BaBaiaawwoaicKHwnwMiiPtiiiiiMaaaw 


AND  THE  WA 


MfflKimimHiiiiiiiiiiiiiiHiiiinirii 


GL/BAS  ON 


mnmmmtmummemgmmftmn 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2008  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/britislilaborwarOOkell 


BRITISH     LABOR 
AND    THE    WAR 

Reconstructors  for 
a  New   World 


BY 
PAUL  U.  KELLOGG 

AND 

ARTHUR  GLEASON 


NEW  YORK 
BONI     AND     LIVERIGHT 

1919 


Copyright,  igip 
Bv  BONI  &  LIVERIGHT.  Inc. 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Introduction vii 

PART  I 

THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 
CHAPTER 

I    The  Workers'  Show  of  Hands 3 

II    The  New  Majority  in  the  British  Labour  Party      ii 

III  The  Swing  Toward  the  Left  in  the  British  Trades 

Union  Congress 18 

IV  British  Labor  United  on  War  Aims 27 

V    The  I.  L.  P.  and  the  Left 33 

YL    The  Nottingham  Meeting 42 

VII    The  New  Issue  and  Its  Engineers 52 

PART  II 
the  western  front  of  labor 

Vin  The  Inter- Allied  Conference  in  London   ...  61 

IX  Allied  Labor's  War  Aims 67 

X  Two-Edged  :  Sword  or  Ploughshare 74 

XI  Another  English  Round  Table 85 

PART  III 

the  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

XII    The  Workers  at  Westminster 105 

XIII  Labor  and  the  New  Social  Order 125 

PART  IV 

workers'  CONTROL 

XIV  The  Shop  Stewards  and  Their  Significance    .     .     149 
XV    Industrial  Unionism 168 

XVI    Self-Government  in  Industry 178 

iii 


PAGE 


iv  CONTENTS 

PART  V 

THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 
CHAPTER 

XVII  The  Jubilee  Year  of  the  British  Trades  Union 

Congress ^97 

XVIII    The  Right  Strikes  Back 214 

XIX    American  Labor  Out  of  It 230 

XX    Labor  in  Leading  Strings 244 

XXI    The  So-Called  Split 257 

XXII    In  Franklin's  Footsteps 273 

XXIII  Democracy  Comes  to  the  Test 305 

PART  VI 

conclusion 

XXIV  Towards  Democracy  in  Reconstruction     ...    333 

APPENDICES 

APPENDIX 

I    Statement  of  War  Aims 343 

Adopted  at  a  joint  conference  of  the  societies  aflSli- 
ated  with  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  and 
the  British  Labour  Party,  at  Central  Hall,  West- 
minster, London,  December  28,  191 7 

II    Memorandum  on  War  Aims 352 

Agreed  upon  at  the  Inter-Allied  Labor  and  Socialist 
Conference,  Central  Hall,  Westminster,  London, 
S.  W.,  February  20-24,  1918 

III  Constitution  of  the  British  Labour  Party     ,     .     367 

As  adopted  by  the  party  conference  held  in  London, 
February  21,  1918 

IV  Labor  and  the  New  Social  Order 37 2 

A  draft  report  on  reconstruction  submitted  by  the 
executive  committee  of  the  British  Labour  Party  at 
the  17th  Annual  Conference,  Nottingham,  January 
23-25,  1918 


CONTENTS  V 

APPENDIX  PAGE 

V    Resolutions  on  Reconstruction        395 

Adopted  by  the  Conference  of  the  British  Labour 
Party,  London,  June  26,  1918 

VI    Platform  of  British  Labour  Party  in  the  General 

Elections,  December,  1918 413 

VII    Interim  (Whitley)  Report  on  Joint  Standing  In- 
dustrial Councils 418 

Sub-committee  on  Relations  between  Employer  and 
Employed;  Reconstruction  Committee 

VIII    Second  (Whitley)  Report  on  Joint  Standing  In- 
dustrial Councils 427 

Committee  on  Relations  between  Employers  and 
Employed;  Ministry  of  Reconstruction 

IX    Supplementary    (Whitley)    Report    on    Works 

Committees 436 

Committee  on  Relations  between  Employers  and 
Employed;  Ministry  of  Reconstruction 

X    Industrial  Councils  and  Trade  Boards      .     .     .    440 
Memorandum  by  the  Minister  of  Reconstruction 
and  the  Minister  of  Labour 

XI    National  Council  of  the  Pottery  Industry  .     .    449 

XII    Workshop  Committees 452 

Suggested  lines  of  development  by  C.  G.  Renold, 
Manchester 

XIII  Summary  of  Conclusions 477 

Reached  by  a   group   of   twenty   British   Quaker 
Employers  after  four  days'  discussion  in  1917-18 

XIV  Shop  Committees  and  Labor  Boards,  by  Arthur 

Gleason 488 

Reprinted  from  the  Survey,  May,  1917 

Index 497 


INTRODUCTION 

Public  attention  has  been  absorbed  in  what  has  been  happen- 
ing in  Russia.  Now  in  Germany.  The  working  class  revolutions  there 
have  been  so  much  more  spectacular  as  to  have  quite  overshadowed 
the  formidable  British  labor  movement  or  to  have  been  confused 
with  it. 

Some  writers  on  the  great  war  have  said  that  the  thing  which 
set  this  war  off  from  any  known  for  a  thousand  years  has  been 
that  it  was  the  wrestlings  of  whole  peoples;  that  here  we  have  been 
dealing  with  folk  movements  unlike  any  that  had  occurred 
since  the  days  when  Saxons  and  Franks,  Teutons  and  Huns  and 
Slavs  swept  over  western  Europe.  However  that  may  be,  there  has 
been  another  folk  movement  at  work  in  the  midst  of  war  in  Europe 
which  is  tremendously  significant.  It  asserted  itself  disruptively  in 
various  stages  of  the  Russian  revolution.  The  same  forces  are 
at  work  elsewhere.  And  in  England  we  have  the  attempt  to  harness 
them  in  a  great  constructive  working  class  movement  which  will 
make  for  changes  in  the  economic  and  political  life,  in  the  period 
following  the  war,  as  sweeping  as  the  changes  wrought  by  those 
middle-class  movements  which  manifested  themselves  in  the  ascend- 
ancy of  nationalism,  and  in  the  struggle  for  liberalism  within  the 
nations. 

In  all  European  history,  we  have  had  in  England  forecasts  of 
fundamental  changes  that  were  coming  on  the  continent.  The  English 
reformation  preceded  the  continental  reformation ;  the  English  swing 
to  parliamentary  government  and  democracy  preceded  the  political 
revolutions  on  the  continent.  For  the  most  part  Englishmen  did 
not  go  through  anything  like  the  travail  and  bitterness  which  the 
continental  peoples  traversed  in  running  the  same  course.  They  did 
not  come  out  at  the  same  point;  but  they  showed  the  trend,  and 
they  showed  it  in  advance.  Even  so,  what  has  been  going  forward 
under  the  stress  of  war  among  the  wage-earning  population  of  the 
island  commonwealth  foreshadows  changes  which  will  affect  and 
condition  the  whole  fabric  of  western  civilization. 

Being  a  folk  movement,  it  is  not  possible  to  compress  it  into 
any  one  channel.  It  is  not  like  the  single  tax  movement,  or  the 
prohibition  movement,  or  the  municipal  ownership  movement  as 


viii  INTRODUCTION 

we  have  known  them  in  this  country,  because  these  are  propaganda 
given  over  to  a  single  issue.  The  British  labor  movement  is  rather 
the  expression  at  a  hundred  points  of  great  tidal  impulses  at  work  in 
the  common  life.  This  book  can  best  serve  American  readers  by 
telling  of  certain  of  its  eager  manifestations — international,  political, 
industrial — that  will  play  an  organic  part  in  the  period  of  recon- 
struction. 


PART    I 
THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 


CHAPTER  I 

THE   workers'    show   OF    HANDS 

At  the  time  the  Allied  premiers  met  in  Paris  in  January,  191 8, 
a  dry  remark  was  credited  to  Georges  Clemenceau,  rugged  figure  in 
the  political  life  of  France  since  before  the  days  of  the  Commune. 

"Napoleon  was  not  so  remarkable  as  we  thought,"  he  said. 
"After  all,  he  fought  only  coalitions." 

His  epigram  put  the  case  for  the  efforts  then  on  foot  to  bring 
about  unity  among  the  Allies,  both  in  military  operations  and  in 
statesmanship.  It  was  natural  that  the  same  forces  should  be  at 
work  among  the  workers  as  among  the  governments.  And  it  is 
characteristic  that,  just  as  the  British  were  the  last  of  the  great 
European  states  to  get  their  full  measure  of  man-power  and  indus- 
trial capacity  into  swing  in  the  war  and,  once  in,  thereafter  took 
over  much  of  the  heavy  end  of  the  front;  so  now,  after  three  years 
of  slow  crystallization  of  opinion,  the  British  labor  movement  came 
forward  to  bear  the  brunt  in  an  Allied  labor  offensive. 

In  pursuit  of  its  objectives,  this  labor  drive  combined  unremit- 
ting resistance  to  Prussian  militarism  in  the  field  with  what  Arthur 
Henderson  called  the  diplomacy  of  democracy.  It  drew  its  dynamic 
from  stirrings  deep  down  in  the  working  life  of  Great  Britain. 

Whether  the  war  was  to  end  through  a  military  decision  or 
through  negotiations,  the  British  workers  served  notice  that  they 
purposed  to  have  a  say  in  the  settlement  of  the  struggle  in  which 
they  had  spent  and  been  spent  so  unstia&-'dly.  They  were  pro- 
foundly at  odds  with  the  whole  scheme  of  foreign  relations  which 
broke  down  in  August,  19 14.  Thev  felt  that  they  had  paid  the 
pipe*",  and  they  did  not  mean  to  leave  their  security  against  future 
wars  solely  in  the  hands  of  the  governing  classes  with  whom  they 
identified  this  war.  They  were  not  sanguine  as  to  the  ability  of 
those  classes  to  get  out  of  it  what  they  went  into  it  for,  much  less 
to  lay  a  new  world  order  that  would  stand.  They  looked  to  the 
common  feeling  and  brotherhood  of  the  masses  the  world  over  as 
the  only  factor  sufficiently  forceful  to  checkmate  competing  com- 
mercialisms— as  a  bond  to  hold  the  world  together,  greater  than 
all  the  international  laws  and  courts  and  treaties  that  could  be 
devised.    They  forecasted  a  recoil  against  the  old  order  of  things 


4  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

which  in  the  period  of  reconstniction  would  effect  changes  in  the 
economic  life,  nation  by  nation,  profound  as  those  in  the  political 
life  following  the  French  revolution  and  the  Napoleonic  wars,  when 
by  the  30 's  the  husks  of  feudalism  were  thrown  aside  and  the  middle 
classes  asserted  themselves  in  terms  of  political  democracy  and  rep- 
resentative government.  With  this  difference:  education,  newspaper 
reading  and  interchange  of  ideas  now  quicken  and  bind  deeper 
reaches  of  the  social  order.  These  the  great  war  had  cut  asunder 
and  isolated.  But  the  working  classes,  nation  by  nation,  had  gone 
through  like  experience,  and  out  of  their  common  travail  might 
they  not  find  common  purpose? 

Thus  it  was  that  the  British  labor  men,  and  behind  them  Allied 
labor,  set  going  their  procedure  to  find  out,  if  they  could,  where 
the  German  and  Austrian  working  classes  (with  whom  before  the 
war  they  had  much  in  common)  stood  close  to  them  on  the  issues 
of  the  struggle  in  which  they  were  pitted  against  each  other;  what 
difterences  separated  them;  which  of  these  differences  were  due  to 
ignorance  and  distortion,  and  so  Qiight  be  swept  away  by  letting  in 
the  light,  which  of  these  differences  were  due  to  obstacles  thrown 
in  the  way  by  other  interests  in  the  national  life,  and  so  might 
be  combated  internally ;  which  of  these  differences,  if  any,  were  in 
truth  irreconcilable,  and  so  must  be  fought  through  to  a  finish. 
And  they  believed  that  their  statement  of  war  aims  brought  the 
issues  back  to  the  unimperialistic  bedrock  on  which  they  (regardless 
of  what  motives  actuated  other  groups  in  their  own  nation  or  in 
other  nations)  had  gone  into  the  war,  and  on  which  they  intended 
to  fight  to  the  end — the  issues  of  self-determination,  which  had 
clustered  about  Belgium  and  which  were  democracy's  answer  to 
militarism  and  conquest.  They  believed  they  could  strip  off  those 
elements  of  competitive  aggrandizement — forcible  annexation,  puni- 
tive indemnities,  economic  boycotts  and  the  rest — which  had  come 
to  encrust  these  first  purposes  and  had  given  color  on  every  hand 
to  the  propaganda  that  each  people  was  fighting  a  war  of  defense. 
They  believed  that  these  issues  were  so  close  to  the  mainsprings 
of  working  class  feeling  that  the  German  socialists  would  get  out 
of  hand  if  their  majority  leaders  refused  to  meet  them.  They 
believed  that  they  could  drive  a  wedge  between  the  German  work- 
ing classes  and  their  governments  which,  sooner  or  later,  would 
rend  the  central  empires  if  the  workers  met  the  issues  and  the 
governments  refused. 

They  were  not  visionaries,  these  labor  leaders;  they  did  not 
expect  to  unravel  in  a  night  a  skein  which  had  been  tangled  and 
knotted  by  years  of  blood  and  strain.  They  did  not  waste  time  in 
debating  whether  it  could  be  cut  with  the  sword,  with  those  who 


THE  WORKERS'  SHOW  OF  HANDS        5 

had  foreshadowed  a  swift  military  decision  with  every  spring. 
Rather,  without  stinting  their  support  to  the  armies  in  the  field, 
they  set  about  the  slow  task  of  putting  as  much  courage,  patience, 
hard  thinking  and  mass  action  into  their  labor  offensive  as  went, 
say,  into  preparing  for  a  half  mile  of  artillery  fire,  barrage  and 
infantry  assault.  And  they  held  it  as  reprehensible  to  ignore  and 
neglect  the  marshaling  of  civil  pressure  in  the  great  struggle  as  it 
would  have  been  to  ignore  the  air  service  or  the  navy. 

They  were  not  defeatists,  these  labor  leaders.  They  were  as 
determined  in  their  project  in  the  fall  of  191 7,  when  the  British 
second  army  thought  it  had  turned  the  corner  of  the  war  at 
Paeschendale  Ridge,  as  they  were  at  their  meeting  the  February 
following,  when  the  whole  talk  on  the  western  front  was  of  how  to 
meet  the  anticipated  German  drive.  They  did  not  abandon  it  in 
the  weeks  of  strain  when  the  German  armies  forged  toward  Amiens 
and  Paris.  They  held  firmly  to  it  in  the  midst  of  the  tremendous 
counter-offensives  of  the  summer  of  1918,  in  which  British  and 
Colonials,  French,  Belgians,  Italians  and  Americans  jointly  drove 
the  invaders  back.  They  simply  did  not  take  stock  in  the  cry  that 
you  could  not  wage  war  and  exert  statesmanship  at  the  same  time. 
They  did  not  fear  that  labor  negotiations  would  demoralize  the 
Allied  armies;  they  held  that  with  whole  nations  at  war,  civilian 
morale  was  as  vital  as  army  morale,  and  that  secret  treaties,  dickers 
over  territory,  the  mistrust  and  lack  of  confidence  which  come  of 
ill-defined  purposes,  were  forces  of  disintegration  which  could  be 
overcome  only  by  bringing  the  purposes  of  the  war  unequivocally 
out  into  the  open  and  out  at  a  level  upon  which  the  average  man 
would  be  fully  willing  to  continue  to  lay  down  his  life  and  that 
of  his  son. 

They  were  not  for  peace-at-any-price.  Their  statement  of  the 
conditions  on  which  they  would  continue  their  support  of  the 
war  and  on  which  they  were  prepared  to  urge  peace  were  affirmative. 
They  were  simply  through  with  talking  about  victory  like  buying 
a  pig  in  a  poke;  about  winning  the  war,  without  setting  forth  what 
ends  you  hoped  to  win  and  without  keeping  your  mind  open  to 
any  less  humanly  costly  way  of  achieving  those  ends. 

They  were  not  for  a  separate  peace.  Their  whole  procedure 
was  to  organize  a  common  front;  and  to  do  it,  not,  as  they  believed 
the  governments  had  done  prior  to  President  Wilson's  initiative, 
by  arriving  at  a  multiple  of  their  several  ambitions,  but  by  cleaving 
through  to  what  were  the  great  common  denominators  of  democratic 
purpose. 

They  were  not  Bolsheviki.  The  British  labor  offensive  antedated 
the  advent  of  the  Bolshevik  regime.     It  was  the  Russian  Mini- 


6  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

malists  who  cabled  concurrence  with  the  British  statement;  it  was 
with  their  leaders  that  they  had  old  associations.  But,  in  common 
with  the  workers  of  all  Europe,  the  British  were  greatly  stirred  by 
the  Russian  revolutions,  and  they  ascribed  in  no  small  part  to  the 
Allies  themselves  (in  failing  to  meet  the  Russian  provisional  govern- 
ment half  way  in  the  matter  of  war  aims,  and  in  blocking  the 
Stockholm  meetings)  the  overthrow  of  Kerensky,  the  cave-in  of  the 
Russian  armies,  and  all  that  those  events  came  to  mean.  And  they 
believed  an  outcome  on  the  eastern  front  altogether  different  from 
the  subsequent  Brest-Litovsk  treaties  was  possible  if  the  same  atti- 
tude were  not  persisted  in  toward  the  Soviets. 

They  were  not,  in  fine,  anything  that  the  jingo  press  described 
them  to  be  in  the  earlier  stages  of  the  movement,  and  they  were 
not  concerned  with  what  it  ascribed  to  them  now,  except  as  this 
afforded  powder  to  their  agitation  and  further  identified  the  con- 
trary policy  with  those  very  forces  with  which,  for  twenty  years 
past,  the  British  labor  movement  had  wrestled  in  forcing  through 
domestic  industrial  and  political  reforms.  Their  positions,  here 
sketched  in  broad  outline,  were,  of  course,  not  altogether  different 
from  those  held  painfully  by  individual  thinkers  and  small  groups  in 
each  of  the  warring  countries,  individuals  and  groups  that  were 
currently  damned  for  their  pains,  and  that  lacked  both  the  mass  and 
momentum  to  get  their  proposals  across  to  the  general  public. 
But  here,  shouldering  4heir  way  up  into  the  arena  not  only  of 
discussion  but  of  decision,  came  a  body  of  men  who  refused,  quite  as 
doggedly  as  the  lonelier  prophets,  to  be  dislodged  by  conventional 
blasts  of  denunciation  and  whom  the  very  winds  of  controversy 
served  only  to  reveal  as  a  rapidly  mustering  host. 

That  this  new  leadership  in  western  Europe  would  spring  from 
the  labor  movement  might  have  been  foreseen. 

With  hold-over  parliaments,  more  or  less  out  of  touch  with  the 
changes  in  public  opinion,  and  with  coalition  governments,  short- 
circuiting  the  development  of  party  sentiment  as  such,  the  policies 
of  the  older  party  groups  failed  to  crystallize  while  the  war  was  on 
in  a  way  clearly  to  differentiate  them.  Thus,  the  British  Labour 
Party  found  its  opportunity;  the  elimination  of  its  secretary,  Arthur 
Henderson,  from  the  British  War  Council  by  way  of  the  "door- 
mat" on  August  II,  191 7,  being  the  occasion  for  its  action  but 
not  its  cause.  Within  the  succeeding  twelve  months  it  slowly 
formulated  a  coherent  program,  both  of  foreign  and  internal 
policy,  which  could  be  weighed  against  that  of  the  government  in 
power  and  which  offered  an  alternative,  fresher  approach  to  issues 
of  war  and  peace;  a  program  which  on  its  international  side 
could  be  taken  over  by  kindred  groups  in  the  Allied  nations  who 


THE  WORKERS'  SHOW  OF  HANDS         7 

had  been  groping  for  such  leadership,  and  which  had  the  tremendous 
reinforcement  of  being,  seemingly,  more  in  line  with  the  free  states- 
manship of  the  American  president  than  the  course  their  own 
governments  were  able  or  chose  to  follow. 

That  it  should  be  in  England  that  this  new  labor  leadership 
would  emerge  might  equally  well  have  been  forecast.  Elsewhere, 
the  groupings  had  been  too  fragmentary;  the  cleavages  between 
extremes.  In  France  and  Germany,  the  socialists  had  been  split  by 
the  war.  The  minority  factions  had  taken  a  position  of  opposition 
to  their  governments  but  that  had  been  not  only  on  matters  of 
policy,  but  on  the  prosecution  of  the  war  itself.  In  Italy,  it  had 
been  the  majority,  but  the  working  classes  in  the  Italian  cities  had 
not  as  yet  found  common  cause  with  the  peasants;  the  proletariat 
was  immature.  In  France  the  syndicalists  presented  a  separate  wing 
of  the  labor  movement,  discounting  both  the  parliamentary  groups 
of  socialists.  Since  the  fall  of  191 7,  Italy,  like  France,  had  been 
invaded,  and  the  psychology  of  the  situation  had  been  against  any 
organized  action  which  might  be  construed  as  counter  to  the  prime 
duty  of  getting  the  invaders  out.  In  undefeated,  uninvaded  Eng- 
land, the  labor  movement  was  freer  to  assert  itself  along  lines  more 
nearly  analogous  to  those  possible  in  peace  times;  and  it  did  so. 

Moreover,  the  British  Labour  Party  was  made  up  largely  of  men 
who  had  been  "for  the  war"  and  who  were  indispensable  to  it;  who 
had  the  disconcerting  effrontery  to  lay  down  with  one  hand  plans 
for  a  great  memorial  in  London  to  their  fellows  who  had  fallen  in 
the  conflict,  and  with  the  other  to  set  going  the  nominating  machin- 
ery for  contesting  not  only  the  35  seats  they  then  held  in  Parliament, 
but  some  300  more. 

The  Miners'  Federation  of  Great  Britain,  for  example,  with  four 
hundred  thousand  unionists  in  the  British  forces,  could  not  lightly 
be  discounted  as  "slackers."  Nor  could  the  Labour  Party  be  set 
aside  as  negligible, — with  its  2,700,000  members,  in  the  overt  act 
of  stretching  their  tent  ropes  to  include  all  workers  "by  hand  or 
by  brain," — with  testimony  of  social  unrest  drawn  by  government 
inquiries  from  every  part  of  the  kingdom, — and  with  fair  prospect 
that  the  troops  when  demobilized  would  strike  hands  with  them. 

So  it  was  that  after  a  Russian  government  had  gone  down  with 
its  plea  for  a  fresh  statement  of  war  aims  unmet;  after  the 
Russian  soviet  program  had  for  two  months  gone  unanswered;  ^ 

'  The  All  Russian  Council  of  Workmen's  and  Soldiers'  Delegates  enu- 
merated 15  points  in  the  form  of  instructions  to  its  delegate  to  the  Allied 
War  Conference,  Paris ;  the  Bolsheviki  took  over  the  government  and 
organized  a  council  of  National  Commissioners  on  November  7,  1917,  in 
whose  name  Leon  Trotsky,  as  national  commissioner  for  foreign  affairs, 
sent  out  the  document  of  15  points  as  a  "formal  offer  of  an  immediate 


8  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

after  a  certain  noble  peer  had  been  soundly  scolded  as  a  pacifist 
Tory  for  writing  a  piece  to  the  papers;  after  President  Wilson's 
earlier  declarations  had  been  met  with  altogether  vague  if  hearty 
assents;  after  the  U.  D.  C.  leaders  and,  at  their  side,  a  score  of 
like-minded  commoners  who  had  never  broken  silence  before,  had 
been  denounced  by  spokesmen  for  the  Cabinet  for  raising  afresh 
the  issue  of  war  aims  at  Westminster;  after  all  these  things,  a 
delegate  conference  of  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  (the 
industrial  organization  of  British  labor)  and  the  Labour  Party  (the 
political  organization  of  British  labor)  came  forward  with  their 
joint  statement  of  war  aims  on  December  28,  191 7,  and  smoked  the 
administration  out.  A  carefully  prepared  statement  was  given  out 
]3y  the  premier  at  a  conference  with  labor  on  the  man  power  bill  on 
January  5,  191 8.  There  followed  President  Wilson's  world-encir- 
cling message  of  fourteen  points  which  the  English  labor  leaders 
hailed  as  kindred  to  their  own;  and  which  the  French  parliamen- 
tarians, in  a  remarkable  session  of  the  Chamber,  claimed  as  breath- 
ing the  very  spirit  of  France,  marred  only  by  the  consciousness 
that  their  own  government  had  not  given  it  utterance  first.  Whatever 
considerations  inside  the  British  War  Cabinet,  and  whatever  com- 
mitments to  the  Allies  outside,  had  inhibited  Lloyd  George  from 
coming  forward  earlier,  no  longer  held  after  labor's  show  of  hands. 
Rightly  or  wrongly,  the  labor  group  felt  that  they  were  the  only 
force  strong  enough  to  have  opened  the  way  for  his  statement; 
the  only  force  strong  enough  in  the  future  to  bring  the  British 
government  into  line  on  those  crucial  points  of  President  Wilson's 
statement,  and  of  their  own,  where  the  British  official  statement  was 
silent;  where  France  and  Italy  had  not  spoken. 

America  entered  the  new  year  (1918)  with  its  full  weight 
thrown  in  the  inter-Allied  war  councils  for  that  unified  command 
of  the  armies  on  the  western  front  which  in  Foch's  hands,  and 
supported  by  fresh  and  ever  fresher  divisions  from  over  seas,  was 

armistice  on  all  fronts  and  the  immediate  opening  of  peace  negotiations ;" 
followed  by  an  invitation  of  Dec.  6,  to  all  embassies  and  legations  to 
participate  and  by  the  issuance  by  the  Russian  plenipotentiaries  of  six 
'basic  principles"  at  Brest-Litovsk,  Dec.  22.  Count  Czernin's  six  clauses 
of  December  25  were  in  reply  to  these  Russian  formulations;  and  Lloyd 
George  in  the  course  of  his  statement  of  January  5  and  President  Wilson 
in  the  course  of  his  message  of  January  8  made  rejoinder  to  Count 
Czernin.  Clearly  the  Allied  governments  felt  the  obligation  of  making  a 
counter  statement  of  war  aims  at  a  time  they  were  holding  aloof  from  the 
Brest-Litovsk  meetings.  The  initiative  of  the  Bolsheviki  as  well  as  the 
pressure  of  British  labor  was  a  factor  in  the  new  public  declarations. 
This  series  of  documents  was  published  in  "A  League  of  Nations"  by  the 
World  Peace  Foundatipn,  Boston,  1918. 


THE  WORKERS'  SHOW  OF  HANDS        9 

to  throw  back  in  defeat  Hindenburg's  supreme  effort  to  break 
through.  It  entered  the  new  year  with  the  President's  message  on 
war  aims  which,  in  the  words  of  an  English  journalist,  was  worth 
a  dozen  army  corps  and  a  regiment  of  angels  to  the  democrats  of 
Western  Europe. 

British  labor  also  entered  the  new  year  with  freshly  girded 
strength.  Nothing  would  have  been  worse  than  for  the  British 
people  to  have  come  into  the  weeks  of  strain  throughout  the  spring 
and  early  summer  of  19 18  with  the  purposes  of  the  war  as  fogged 
as  they  had  been  the  year  preceding.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say 
that,  while  the  bloody  gains  of  the  German  drive  in  France  were 
strengthening  the  grip  of  the  Prussian  imperialists  upon  Germany, 
the  British  labor  offensive  proved  a  counter  force  for  coherence 
and  endurance  at  home.  In  its  own  statement  of  war  aims  and 
in  the  statement  it  elicited  from  the  British  government,  at  the 
close  of  191 7,  it  gave  the  common  people  afresh  the  democratic 
issues  that  had  fired  them  in  those  earlier  days  of  trial  in  19 14. 
So  doing,  like  the  American  president,  British  labor  gave  them  to 
the  common  people  of  all  the  Allies. 

Meeting  in  London  in  February,  19 18,  representatives  of  labor 
and  socialist  groups  in  England,  France,  Italy  and  Belgium  (Ruma- 
nian, South  Slav  and  South  African  delegations  sitting  in)  accepted 
in  substance  the  war  aims  put  out  by  British  labor  in  December; 
called  on  socialist  and  labor  groups  in  the  central  powers  to  match 
this  declaration;  projected  a  consultative  conference  with  them  while 
the  war  was  on  if  the  conditions  laid  down  were  met;  endorsed 
plans  for  an  international  labor  conference  to  sit  concurrently  with 
the  official  peace  conference  whenever  held;  and  called  for  a  labor 
representative  on  each  national  delegation  to  the  latter. 

Thus,  the  early  winter  months  of  191 7-18,  which  marked  the 
turn  of  the  tide  in  Allied  unity  in  waging  war  and  in  democratic 
statesmanship,  witnessed  three  steps  in  the  deliberate  execution  of 
the  British  labor  offensive. 

Their  first  step  was  to  get  unanimity  on  war  aims  among  the 
labor  bodies  of  Great  Britain;  their  second  to  bank  up  majority 
and  minority  labor  groups  among  the  Allies  behind  a  common 
program;  their  third  to  outflank  the  trench  deadlocks  and  diplo- 
matic inhibitions  that  for  four  years  had  isolated  the  working 
classes  of  Europe,  and  to  get  their  conception  of  an  unimperialistic 
settlement  before  the  workers  of  the  Central  Empires.  In  so 
doing  they  sought  to  find  out  for  themselves  first-hand  whether 
or  not  they  might  help  open  a  way  to  a  peace  which  would  not 
only  be  safe  for  democracy,  but  democracy's  own. 

The  succeeding  chapters  in  this  section  [Part  I]  will  interpret 


10  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

the  slow  crystallization  of  working  class  opinion  in  England  first 
in  the  Labour  Party  and  then  in  the  Trades  Union  Congress  which, 
in  191 7,  had  led  up  to  the  first  of  these  steps.  Succeeding  sections 
will  interpret  the  later  steps  [Part  II] ;  the  deep-seated  forces  which 
impelled  them  in  the  political  [Part  III]  and  economic  [Part  IV] 
life  of  Great  Britain;  labor's  share  in  the  swift  events  of  1918,  lead- 
ing up  to  the  armistice  and  the  end  of  the  war  [Part  V] ;  and  the 
presage  inherent  in  these  things  of  British  labor's  part  in  the  new 
epoch  of  reconstruction  [Part  VI]. 


CHAPTER    II 

THE  NEW  MAJORITY  IN  THE  BRITISH  LABOUR  PARTY 

If  we  go  back  but  a  year,  we  find  the  British  Labour  Party  not 
at  all  taking  the  initiative  in  the  matter  of  labor  diplomacy,  but 
rather  hanging  back.  In  January,  191 7,  its  convention  at  Man- 
chester voted  against  participating  in  an  international  conference 
as  promoted  by  the  Stockholm  committee.  In  March,  191 7,  its 
executive  turned  down  an  invitation  from  the  French  Socialist 
Party  for  a  conference  of  Allied  socialists  in  Paris;  in  May,  191 7, 
it  turned  down  invitations  to  consultations  arranged  by  the  Dutch- 
Scandinavian  committee  in  Stockholm.  It  did  not  respond  to  the 
announcement  shortly  thereafter  that  the  Russian  Council  of  Work- 
men's and  Soldiers'  Deputies  had  decided  to  issue  invitations  "to 
the  socialist  and  labor  parties  of  all  nations  to  a  conference,  with 
a  view  to  securing  the  adoption  of  a  general  working  class  policy" — 
other  than  to  appoint  a  committee  to  visit  Russia,  which  never  set 
sail. 

Meanwhile,  Arthur  Henderson,  then  a  member  in  the  British 
War  Cabinet  and  one  of  the  labor  leaders  at  that  time  opposed 
to  an  international  conference,  had  proceeded  to  Petrograd  on  a 
government  mission,  in  the  course  of  which  he  met  the  executive 
of  the  Workmen's  and  Soldiers'  Council  and  spoke  to  them  in  his 
capacity  as  secretary  of  the  Labour  Party.  It  was  made  clear  to 
him  that,  whether  the  British  workers  participated  or  not,  an 
attempt  would  be  made  by  the  Russian  workers  to  hold  the  con- 
ference. Out  of  his  experience  in  Russia,  Henderson  came  to 
believe  that  unless  negotiations  for  a  constructive  peace  were  asso- 
ciated in  the  minds  of  the  Russian  people  with  their  provisional 
government,  it  would  crumble — as  it  later  did;  he  felt  that  many 
confused  ideas  were  current  in  Russia  as  to  the  aims  for  which  his 
fellow  countrymen  were  continuing  the  struggle;  that  such  a  con- 
ference would  clear  them  up;  and  that  it  would  be  "highly  inad- 
visable and  perhaps  dangerous  for  the  Russian  representatives  to 
meet  representatives  from  enemy  and  neutral  countries  alone."  On 
the  other  hand,  he  made  it  equally  clear  that  British  labor  could 
only  join  in  the  plan  if  it  were  turned  from  an  obligatory  confer- 
ence to  a  consultation  for  the  purpose  of  exchanging  views. 

II 


12  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

I  made  it  as  plain  as  I  was  capable  of  doing  that  if  a  conference 
was  held  in  which  we  participated  there  could  be  no  question  of 
negotiating  peace  terms.  I  pointed  out  that  the  socialists  and  labor 
parties  in  this  and  other  countries  were  not  yet  the  nation,  and  that 
the  only  people  who  were  responsible  for  negotiating  actual  peace 
terms  were  the  governments  of  the  respective  countries,  for  upon 
them  rested,  on  behalf  of  the  people,  the  entire  responsibility. 

— This  paragraph  is  quoted  from  Henderson's  report  to  a  special 
party  conference  held  in  London  in  August,  191 7,  which  followed 
consultations  between  Russian  and  British  labor  leaders  in  London, 
and  Russian,  British  and  French  labor  leaders  in  Paris,  at  which, 
the  British  reconsidered  their  decision  to  stay  out  of  the  conference; 
and  on  the  other  hand,  its  non-binding  character  was  agreed  to  by 
the  others.  On  Henderson's  recommendation  and  by  a  vote  of 
1,846,000  to  550,000,  the  British  Labour  Party  approved  the 
amended  plan. 

The  parting  of  the  ways  came  at  a  special  conference  held  by 
the  party  at  Central  Hall,  Westminster,  London,  on  August  10, 
19 1 7,  Vi^hen  by  the  majority  of  1,296,000  the  membership  sustained 
the  executive  in  its  resolution: 

That  the  invitation  of  the  international  conference  at  Stock- 
holm be  accepted  on  condition  that  the  conference  be  consultative 
and  not  mandatory. 

Preliminary  canvasses,  according  to  the  London  Times,  indicated 
that  the  vote  of  the  miners  would  carry  the  decision  one  way  or 
another;  "while  the  miners'  decision  was,  in  turn,  believed  to  be 
largely  dependent  on  the  statement  which  Arthur  Henderson,  M.P., 
labor's  representative  on  the  War  Cabinet,  would  make." 

Henderson's  speech  carried  the  miners,  and  in  the  afternoon 
the  resolution  came  before  the  conference  on  motion  of  representa- 
tives of  two  of  the  most  powerful  trade  union  groups  of  Great 
Britain,  W.  C.  Robinson  of  the  textile  workers  moving  it,  W.  Carter 
of  the  miners  seconding.  The  attack  came  from  the  right,  when 
J.  Sexton  of  the  Liverpool  Dock  Labourers  (47,000  members)  moved 
an  amendment  that: 

While  agreeing  that  he  (Henderson)  was  actuated  by  a  sincere 
desire  to  serve  the  best  interests  of  the  British  democracy,  no  case 
had  been  made  out  for  the  appointment  of  delegates  to  the  Stock- 
holm or  any  other  conference  which  would  include  delegates  from 
enemy  countries. 

There  were  times,  he  said,  when  loyalty  to  an  executive,  particularly 
in  a  case  like  this,  meant  treason  to  the  rank  and  file.    To  go  to 


NEW  MAJORITY  IN  THE  BRITISH  LABOUR  PARTY  13 

Stockholm,  he  concluded,  was  to  meet  men  who  had  not  repudiated 
the  brutality  of  their  masters,  men  whose  hands  were  red  with  the 
blood  of  Capt.  Fryatt,  Nurse  Cavell  and  the  crew  of  the  Belgian 
Prince.  When  they  had  repudiated  these  crimes,  and  not  before, 
his  objection  to  meeting  them  would  be  gone. 

His  attack  was  supported  by  Henderson's  fellow  labor  members 
of  the  ministry — G.  N.  Barnes  (Minister  of  Pensions),  who  shortly 
supplanted  Henderson  as  a  member  of  the  War  Cabinet,  and  who 
denounced  the  proposal  of  a  consultative  conference  as  a  distinction 
between  Tweedle-dee  and  Tweedle-dum ;  and  George  Roberts,  M.P., 
then  secretary  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  to  whose  mind  Henderson's 
speech  was  little  more  than  an  endeavor  to  "take  a  scenic  photograph 
through  a  Scotch  mist." 

Said  Barnes: 

I  say  that  if  you  go  there  you  will  go  to  discuss  with  the  Germans 
and  the  Russians,  and  with  the  Dutch-Scandinavians  as  a  make- 
weight, or  a  make-believe,  with  no  other  purpose  than  to  vote  for 
peace  on  any  terms.  ...  It  is  a  matter  as  between  tweedledum  and 
tweedledee  whether  you  are  there  in  a  consultative  conference  or 
a  mandatory  one.  It  seems  to  me  the  difference  is  very  small  and 
if  you  go  at  all  you  will  be  in  the  same  position  whether  it  is  one  or 
the  other.  The  main  fact  is  that  if  you  decide  to  go  there  you  will 
be  going  there  to  discuss  terms  of  peace.  Is  this  the  time  to  discuss 
terms  of  peace  in  that  manner?  (Cries  of  "Yes"  and  "No.")  I 
think  it  is  not.  Whatever  are  the  ostensible  purposes  of  the  con- 
ference, you  will  be  drawn  into  a  discussion  of  the  formula  "No 
indemnities  and  no  annexations."  Do  not  let  us  be  misled  by 
phrases.  This  war  will  end  in  a  way  that  will  be  determined  by 
the  relative  strength  of  parties  at  the  end  of  it,  and  if  we  end  this 
war  now  the  Germans  will  decide  for  you  what  is  meant  by  "no 
indemnities  and  no  annexations."  I  decline  to  be  led  away  by  any 
such  phrase-mongering.  I  believe  that  the  only  way  of  ending  this 
war  is  the  way  in  which  our  boys  at  the  front  are  trying  to  end  it. 

Said  Roberts: 

The  Stockholm  Conference  would  be  the  greatest  embarrassment 
to  those  who  were  seeking  to  bring  order  out  of  chaos  in  Russia. 
What  M.  Kerensky  and  his  government  needed  now  was  to  be  left 
alone.  The  Stockholm  Conference  would  only  sow  further  dissen- 
sion and  play  into  the  hands  of  the  greatest  enemies  of  law  and 
order  in  Russia.  As  to  misrepresentations  of  British  views  and  per- 
version of  the  British  cause  in  Russia,  parts  of  their  own  movement 
were  responsible  for  it  as  much  as  anything.  The  conference  would 
be  futile  unless  it  included  representatives  of  American  labor.  Mr. 
Gompers  and  his  colleagues  had  scented  the  futility  of  the  thing, 


14  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

but  they  saw  the  German  hand  behind  it.  The  German  agents  in 
Petrograd  had  played  upon  the  inexperienced  representatives  of  the 
Workmen's  and  Soldiers'  Council,  and  had  engineered  the  movement 
not  because  they  hoped  it  would  reestablish  fraternity,  but  because 
they  hoped  that  the  purpose  of  the  Allied  nations  could  be 
again  distorted,  and  because  they  knew  that  at  the  conference 
they  would  have  an  overwhelming  representation  and  could  carry 
everything  before  them.  The  conference  would  weaken  the  national 
spirit  and  prejudice  the  Allied  cause  and  he  was  certain  that  the 
great  mass  of  the  people  were  opposed  to  it.  The  German  people 
were  as  united  and  determined  for  the  war  as  when  they  began  it. 
They  had  gloated  over  every  barbarity.  For  representatives  of  the 
British  working  classes  to  go  into  conference  with  representatives  of 
such  people  would  be  a  gross  betrayal  of  the  men  who  constituted 
our  great  army. 

As  one  now  of  a  minority  in  the  British  Labour  Party  executive, 
Roberts  with  sarcasm  congratulated  Henderson  on  being  welcomed 
into  the  new  majority.  The  welcome  had  come  from  Ramsay  Mac- 
Donald,  who  for  a  while  was  unable  to  proceed  owing  to  a  fusillade 
of  interruptions  from  various  parts  of  the  hall,  and  the  chairman, 
after  much  ringing  of  his  bell,  had  to  appeal  to  the  conference  to 
support  him  in  maintaining  order.  The  incident  put  in  terms  of 
personality  the  shift  which  had  taken  place.  MacDonald  stated 
the  case  for  the  "left,"  v/hich  now  for  the  first  time  since  1914 
found  itself  part  of  the  majority;  saying,  according  to  the  London 
Times: 

Russia  wanted  their  support.  The  revolution  which  awakened 
such  enthusiasm  in  their  hearts,  and  struck  through  with  a  mag- 
nificent beam  of  light  the  darkness  that  was  lying  over  Europe, 
tottered  and  trembled  day  by  day,  and  the  one  thing  that  would  give 
it  a  firm  democratic  foundation  was  that  the  democracy  of  Russia 
should  be  assured  that  the  democracy  of  Europe  was  consulted  on 
the  war  and  on  war  aims.  British  labor  was  asked  to  go  to  that 
consultation,  and  to  put  their  views  alongside  the  views  of  other 
people,  to  assure  Russia  that  there  was  no  imperialism  in  this  war, 
and  that  democracy  was  fighting  the  battle  of  democracy  from  an 
international  point  of  view.  That  is  what  Russia  wants.  Is  British 
labor  not  going  to  it? 

And  that  is  not  all.  Do  not  we  want  to-day  from  the  interna- 
tional democracies  of  Europe  a  clear  statement  of  what  we  stand 
for,  so  that  he  who  runs  may  read?  To-day  we  are  revising  our 
aims  officially.  Why  cannot  we  revise  our  aims  democratically  at 
the  same  time?  Why  cannot  we  lay  down  in  clause  after  clause 
what  we  will  regard  as  the  security  upon  which  alone  peace  can  be 
made  and  ask  our  German  friends  (loud  protest)  how  far  they 
agree  with  them  and  how  far  they  disagree  with  them? 


NEW  MAJORITY  IN  THE  BRITISH  LABOUR  PARTY    15 

Before  the  vote,  Henderson's  support  from  the  center  was  voiced 
by  J.  H.  Thomas  of  the  National  Union  of  Railwaymen.  He  was 
quoted  as  saying: 

He  hoped  that  they  would  hear  no  more  of  the  enemies  of  our 
country  and  the  friends  of  our  country.  He  was  as  true  a  patriot 
as  anybody,  and  he  was  satisfied  that  no  German  would  browbeat 
him  or  compel  him  to  do  anything  contrary  to  the  best  interests  of 
this  country.  Did  they  condemn  the  meeting  of  Lord  Newton  with 
German  representatives  a  few  weeks  ago,  which  resulted  in  immense 
good  to  our  men  in  the  enemy's  hands?  Did  any  one  believe  that 
at  some  time  or  other  they  would  not  have  to  meet  the  enemy?  .  .  . 

He  would  warn  those  who  threatened  that  steps  would  be  taken 
to  prevent  any  delegate  going,  no  matter  what  the  decision  of  the 
conference  might  be,  to  be  careful  what  they  were  doing.  The  time 
would  come  when  those  who  aided  and  abetted  that  policy  would  be 
the  first  to  suffer. 

In  its  comment  on  this  meeting,  the  London  Times  scored 
Henderson  and  declared  that  his  position  as  a  minister  was  clearly 
at  an  end  (as  it  straightway  proved) — "not  because  of  any  diver- 
gence about  the  war,  but  because  his  maneuvers  during  the  last 
fortnight  are  incompatible  with  every  principle  of  solid  govern- 
ment;" i.e.,  his  good  faith  in  "attempting  the  impossible  perform- 
ance of  running  one  policy  as  a  labor  leader  and  another  as  a 
member  of  the  cabinet."  It  denounced  the  Stockholm  meeting  as 
follows: 

One  has  only  to  ask  what  belligerent  governments  are  in  favor 
of  the  conference  at  all  in  order  to  see  what  lies  under  the  surface. 
The  only  governments  which  patronize  it  are  the  enemy  govern- 
ments; all  the  Allied  nations  are  against  it.  Surely  that  is  enough 
to  show  its  true  purpose.  Whether  it  is  called  mandatory  or  con- 
sultative, it  is  a  trick  to  get  representatives  of  allied  labor  to  hobnob 
with  "our  German  friends"  and  to  film  them  in  the  act  in  order  to 
cheer  up  the  German  people  and  convince  them  that  the  peace  they 
desire — a  German  peace — is  at  hand,  if  they  will  only  maintain  their 
faith  in  Hindenburg  and  U-boats. 

The  Times  attributed  the  three  and  one-half  to  one  vote  in 
part  to  the  system  by  which  the  miners,  railway  men  and  other 
large  bodies  voted  in  blocks — an  element  of  the  strength  of  the 
central  group  and  a  cause  for  complaint  on  the  part  of  both  the 
extreme  right  and  left;  but  the  "real  explanation"  was  to  be  found, 
it  said,  in  Henderson's  speech: 

The  point  is  that  there  are  two  Stockholm  conferences,  or  two 
conceptions  of  that  elusive  gathering.  The  first  is  that  its  decisions 
shall  be  binding  on  those  who  attend  it;  the  second  that  it  shall  be 


i6  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

purely  consultative  and  not  bind  anybody.  Now  the  invitation  is 
to  a  conference  of  the  first  kind,  but  yesterday's  decision  is  an 
acceptance  of  the  second.  It  is,  in  fact,  the  acceptance  of  an  invi- 
tation v^hich  has  not  been  given  and  a  rejection  of  the  one  that  has. 

The  Times  was  right  in  its  analysis  of  the  paradox  of  invita- 
tions: British  labor  cut  the  knot  by  separating  itself  from  Stock- 
holm and  its  antecedents,  and  by  doing  its  own  inviting  to  a  con- 
ference of  its  own  fashioning;  and,  six  months  later,  the  Times  was 
saying  that  its  workmanship  was  good.  Four  of  those  six  months 
were  spent  in  the  slow  formulation  of  platform  and  procedure. 
Henderson  was  charged  by  the  Prime  Minister  with  breach  of 
faith  as  a  member  of  the  War  Cabinet,  and  resigned;  and  announce- 
ment was  made  that  the  British  government  would  issue  no  pass- 
ports to  delegates  to  attend  the  Stockholm  meeting.  An  inter- 
Allied  conference  called  by  the  British  section  of  the  Inter- 
national Socialist  Bureau  [London,  August  21,  1917]  brought 
together  sixty-eight  delegates  representing  eight  nationalities,  but 
reached  no  definite  agreements  with  respect  either  to  war  aims  ^  or 
to  the  conditions  of  an  international  conference,  and  apparently  got 
snarled  up  over  the  question  of  minority  and  majority  representa- 
tions and  votes. 

Then  it  was  that  the  British  labor  movement  started  in  to  build 
up  from  the  bottom.  And  the  first  opportunity  which  offered 
showed  the  overwhelming  swing  of  feeling  among  the  rank  and 
file.  This  was  at  the  Blackpool  meeting  in  early  September  (191 7) 
of  the  Trades  Union  Congress — the  inclusive  national  organization 
of  British  trade  unions  in  the  economic  field.  By  a  vote  of  2,849,- 
000  to  91,000,  a  compromise  resolution  which  was  put  forward  by 
Robert  Smillie  and  seconded  by  Will  Thorne,  threw  the  Stockholm 
meeting  as  such  into  the  junk  heap,  emphatically  protested  as  a 
matter  of  principle  against  the  government's  refusal  to  give  pass- 
ports, declared  that  a  general  agreement  among  the  working  classes 
of  the  Allied  nations  was  "a  fundamental  condition  of  a  successful 
international  congress"  and  recommended  that  the  Parliamentary 
Committee  of  the  congress  be  empowered  to  ''assist,  arrange  and 
take  part  in  such  a  conference."  The  chronicle  of  this  action  of 
the  Trades  Union  Congress  v/ill  be  found  in  Chapter  IV. 

The  executive  of  the  Labour  Party  accepted  this  resolution  as 
a  basis  for  joint  action  with  the  Trades  Union  Congress.  A  joint 
committee  was  created  to  formulate  a  memorandum  on  war  aims,^ 

*  The  original  British  Labour  Party  memorandum  on  war  airns,  drawn 
up  for  this  August,  1917,  conference,  was  the  basis  of  the  later  memoranda. 
'Appendix  L 


NEW  MAJORITY  IN  THE  BRITISH  LABOUR  PARTY  17 

and  the  joint  confeicnce  of  the  two  bodies  held  in  London  in  Decem- 
ber, 191 7,  adopted  the  joint  draft.  The  chronicle  of  this  joint- 
action  will  be  found  in  Chapter  V. 

These  characteristics  stand  out,  throughout,  in  the  procedure  of 
the  British  labor  offensive,  as  distinct  from  the  movements  which 
preceded  it:  That  its  proposed  international  labor  and  socialist 
conference  was  to  be  consultative  and  not  mandatory;  that  it  was 
to  be  a  voluntary  exchange  of  views  and  not  an  attempt  to  assume 
government  function,  and  that  it  was  in  no  way  to  interfere  with 
military  effort.  Further,  the  procedure  provided  not  for  a  loose 
body  of  labor  groups  meeting  for  the  first  time  in  the  presence 
of  a  solid  Germanic  delegation,  but  for  joint  action  by  a  real  alliance 
of  Allied  labor;  it  provided  for  going  into  the  conference  with  a 
deliberately  formulated  program  of  aims  which  might  be  modified 
as  to  details,  but  in  which  the  democratic  principles  at  stake  were 
nailed  down,  and  (as  later  developed)  it  provided  for  subscription 
to  those  principles  and  evidence  of  readiness  to  press  for  them  as 
a  prerequisite  on  the  part  of  any  German  units  which  might  par- 
ticipate. 

All  this  was  at  great  variance  with  the  earlier  conference  projects 
associated  with  Stockholm  and  with  the  Russian  Soviet  in  19 17, 
which  were  to  have  been  much  more  binding  but  were  un- 
organized. It  was,  however,  as  much  at  variance  with  the  former 
stand-off  position  of  British  labor  and  with  the  subsequent  stand- 
off position  of  American  labor,  as  it  was  with  the  procedure  of  the 
Brest-Litovsk  meetings  of  1917-18,  engineered  by  the  Bolsheviki. 
These  last  were  marked  by  the  abandonment  of  military  activity 
and  were  predicated  on  the  announced  belief  of  the  Russian  extrem- 
ists that  the  German  working  classes  would  and  could  hold  their 
governments  up  to  a  course  which  would  safeguard  the  republic  and 
the  revolution.  The  strength  and  the  weakness  of  the  Brest- 
Litovsk  meetings  was  that,  as  the  London  Spectator  put  it,  they 
were  like  the  pounding  of  a  mailed  fist  into  a  feather-bed.  Now, 
the  British  labor  offensive  partook  of  the  nature  neither  of  a 
gauntlet  nor  of  a  bed-tick — rather,  of  a  crow-bar. 


CHAPTER    III 

THE  SWING  TOWARD  THE   LEFT   IN   THE  BRITISH   TRADES  UNION 

CONGRESS 

But  we  must  look  deeper  than  the  form  of  international  meet- 
ings, or  even  the  desire  of  British  labor  to  help  keep  Russia  in  the 
war,  to  understand  the  "swing  toward  the  left"  in  mass  sentiment, 
or  the  determined  moderate  leadership  which  moulded  that  senti- 
ment into  a  constructive  social  leverage.  Some  characteristic  labor 
debates  will  help  to  make  this  clear,  and  for  this  purpose  let  us  turn 
from  the  political  to  the  industrial  field  and  follow  three  annual 
meetings  [Birmingham,  191 6;  Blackpool,  191 7;  Derby,  191 8]  of 
the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  (over  4,000,000  members),  the 
greatest  and  the  most  insular  of  the  British  labor  bodies,  which 
before  the  war  had  taken  little  part  in  foreign  affairs.  It  had  been 
content  to  let  the  General  Federation  of  Trade  Unions  (800,000 
members)  function  as  participant  in  the  pre-war  international  trade 
union  body  with  headquarters  in  Berlin,  and  build  up  close  relations 
with  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  also  a  participant;  though 
the  congress  itself  exchanged  fraternal  delegates  with  the  American 
Federation.  Meanwhile,  not  only  the  British  Labour  Party,  but 
the  Independent  Labour  Party  and  other  British  socialist  organ- 
izations had  long  had  active  affiliations  with  the  International  Social- 
ist Bureau  with  headquarters  in  Brussels. 

Birmingham:  191 6 

At  the  Birmingham  meeting  of  the  British  Trades  Union  Con- 
gress, in  September,  19 16,  a  circular  letter  was  read  from  Samuel 
Gompers  who  addressed  "all  the  national  labor  movements  of  the 
world,"  inviting  them  to  cooperate  in  the  holding  of  an  interna- 
tional trade  union  congress,  at  the  same  time  and  place  as  the 
meeting  of  the  official  peace  plenipotentiaries  at  the  close  of  the 
war.  It  was  reported  that  no  program  or  theory  as  to  what  such 
a  congress  should  do  was  offered  in  the  circular;  the  representa- 
tives were  to  be  free  to  use  whatever  opportunity  came  to  promote 
the  interests  of  the  workers  in  connection  with  the  terms  of  settle- 
ment. The  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  Trades  Union  Congress 
recommended  that  British  labor  should  cooperate,  but  by  a  vote  of 

18 


THE  BRITISH  TRADES  UNION  CONGRESS  19 

1,486,000  votes  to  723,000  the  Congress  itself  struck  the  resolu- 
tion out. 

This  was  at  the  close  of  England's  second  year  of  war. 
Gompers'  circular  was  in  line  with  action  taken  by  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  at  its  San  Francisco  convention  and  was  dated 
March  23,  191 6,  or  a  year  before  the  United  States  entered  the  war. 
The  few  arguments  on  the  floor  of  the  British  Congress  in  191 6  in 
support  of  Gompers'  proposal  were  not  very  different  from  those 
which  Gompers  himself  was  to  encounter,  two  years  hence,  when, 
no  longer  a  neutral,  and  an  opponent  of  any  war  time  meeting  with 
German  labor,  he  attended  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  at 
Derby  in  1918.  C.  G.  Ammon  of  the  Fawcett  Association  (6,400 
members),  who  had  been  a  fraternal  delegate  to  the  San  Francisco 
convention,  appealed  to  the  Birmingham  meeting  of  19 16  not  to  be 
misled  by  prejudice.     He  was  quoted  as  follows: 

The  intention  of  the  American  Federation  was  that  the  pro- 
posed international  labor  congress  should  be  representative  of  the 
workers  of  all  the  belligerent  nations,  that  the  workers  who  were 
suffering  in  every  country  should  be  called  together  at  the  end  of 
the  war  to  consider  ways  and  means  of  making  such  a  tragedy 
impossible  in  the  future.  They  should  remember  that  when  the 
fighting  was  over  the  German  working  man,  like  the  British  working 
man,  would  still  have  his  work  to  do  in  the  world,  and  would  find 
that  he  and  his  dependents  were  suffering  even  more  than  those  here. 
The  German  workers  were  no  more  to  blame  for  the  great  catastro- 
phe which  had  come  upon  the  world  than  the  British  workers  were 
able  to  prevent  the  imposition  of  Prussian  institutions  here.  (Cheers 
and  some  booing.) 

But  these  were  lonely  voices.  Jack  Jones  of  the  General  Work- 
ers (164,000  members)  charged  the  German  socialists  with  "selling" 
the  international  labor  movement.  "Under  the  plea  that  they 
were  afraid  of  invasion,"  he  said: 

they  decided  to  invade  and  on  the  altar  of  liberty  they  sacrificed  lib- 
erty. As  one  who  came  from  Ireland  he  was  no  defender  of  im- 
perialism, but  he  would  rather  have  the  devil  he  knew  than  the  devil 
he  did  not  know,  and  he  would  rather  have  a  slave-driver  of  his 
own  blood  than  one  of  another  blood. 

To  quote  other  delegates  as  reported  in  the  London  Times: 

T.  McKerrell  (Miners'  Federation)  asked  whether  the  socialists 
of  Germany  who  might  attend  this  conference  would  be  the  socialists 
whom  the  Kaiser  sent  to  Belgium  after  the  massacres  to  persuade 
the  Belgian  people  that  they  ought  to  welcome  German  rule,  and  if 


20  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

so  whether  the  Belgian  workmen  who  escaped  massacre  would  sit 
in  the  same  room. 

George  Roberts,  M.P.,  said  the  British  workers  should  not  sanc- 
tion any  negotiations  with  the  German  Social  Democrats  or  their 
government  until  the  German  democracy  had  purged  themselves  of 
Kaiserdom  and  all  for  which  it  stood.  Some  people  thought  they 
were  inclined  to  do  it;  he  did  not  believe  it.  The  German  socialists, 
like  the  German  people  as  a  whole,  believed  in  militarism  as  a 
means  of  dominating  the  world.  If  this  proposal  were  persisted 
in  it  would  mean,  for  generations  to  come,  the  biggest  split  in  the 
British  labor  movement  that  they  had  ever  dreamed  of.  The  Ger- 
man appreciated  nothing  but  force  and  brute  power,  and  nothing  else 
would  induce  him  to  expiate  his  crimes. 

— ^Arguments,  all  of  them  apparently,  which  Gompers  took  to 
heart  so  entirely  that  with  the  lapse  of  time,  and  their  positions 
reversed,  he  employed  no  others  more  vehemently  in  countering 
the  later  British  program  which  embodied  his  own  proposal  as  one 
of  its  chief  features. 

At  Birmingham,  also,  Will  Thorne,  M.P.,  said  he  would  wel- 
come a  congress  of  labor  from  Allied  or  neutral  countries,  but  char- 
acterized as  "absurd"  the  suggestion  to  have  "delegates  from 
Germany,  Austria,  Turkey  and  Bulgaria  at  a  congress  that  was  to 
advise  our  plenipotentiaries  upon  the  terms  of  peace."  He  believed 
that  99  per  cent  of  the  people  of  England  would  oppose  any  gov- 
ernment which  attempted  to  make  terms  of  peace  imtil  every 
German  was  cleared  out  of  Belgium  and  France. 

Blackpool:  191 7 

Twelve  months  later,  at  Blackpool  as  indicated  in  the  preceding 
chapter,  we  find  Thorne  seconding  Smillie's  resolution,  which  came 
from  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  which  both  were  members, 
that  the  Trades  Union  Congress  "assist  and  take  part,"  not  only 
in  an  inter-Allied,  but  an  inter-belligerent  conference.  Thorne  said 
in  part: 

There  are  deep-rooted  convictions  in  the  minds  of  many  of  the 
members  of  our  unions.  Some  are  taking  one  side,  and  some  the 
other,  and,  therefore,  it  does  appear  to  me  that  those  responsible 
for  the  respective  organizations  to-day  have  a  tremendous  task  in 
front  of  them  to  keep  the  members  united  during  the  rest  of  the 
war.  There  are  little  differences  of  opinion  amongst  us  to-day;  but, 
so  far  as  my  opinions  are  concerned,  when  the  war  is  over,  I  shall 
be  quite  prepared,  if  the  other  side  is  willing  to  meet  together  again 
upon  the  one  common  platform,  to  fight  the  common  enemy — and 


THE  BRITISH  TRADES  UNION  CONGRESS  21 

that  is  organized  capital — right  throughout  the  length  and  breadth 
of  this  world. 

Delegates  of  the  Sailors'  and  Firemen's  Union  (55,000  mem- 
bers), which  at  the  outset  of  the  war  got  an  internment  camp  set 
up  for  German  seamen  employed  on  British  ships,  and  looked  after 
them,  were  the  very  ones  who  led  the  fight  against  the  resolution 
at  Blackpool. 

Said  J.  Henson: 

Over  6,000  men  of  the  British  mercantile  marine  have  been  mur- 
dered by  German  submarines.  You  have  heard  of  men,  in  days 
gone  by,  being  cast  away  at  sea,  and  the  time  came  when  they  had 
to  cast  lots  as  to  which  should  die  so  that  the  others  might  live. 
Only  a  short  time  ago,  the  steamer  Cariba  was  in  the  Bay  of  Biscay, 
when  she  was  torpedoed  by  a  submarine.  The  lifeboat  and  the  jolly- 
boat  were  got  out,  and  the  submarine  sunk  the  jolly-boat,  with  the 
result  that  in  the  lifeboat  twenty-two  men  had  to  drift  about  for 
nine  solid  days,  with  only  a  few  biscuits  and  a  small  supply  of 
water.  One  by  one  they  died  from  the  cold,  for  in  March  we  had 
bad  weather.  The  captain  and  fireman  and  engineer  were  dropped 
over  the  side  of  the  boat,  and  on  the  ninth  day  there  were  nine 
survivors,  who  had  been  frost-bitten  from  their  knees,  and  had 
their  feet  off  and  their  legs,  when  they  were  at  last  rescued  and 
taken  to  the  hospital.  That  is  the  sort  of  "friendliness"  we  receive 
from  the  Germans,  towards  whom  you  ask  us  to  adopt  a  friendly 
attitude  in  this  resolution.  If  you  came  into  our  trade  union  office — 
Thomas,  MacDonald,  or  any  one  else — and  listened  to  the  stories  of 
the  men  who,  after  being  torpedoed  four,  five,  and  six  times,  have 
willingly  gone  back  to  sea  to  bring  food  to  every  man  who  is  sitting 
in  this  congress,  you  would  not  ask  us  to  meet  our  enemies  round  a 
friendly  table. 

We  can  never  meet  the  German  again,  in  the  future,  in  the  inter- 
national movement.  Our  men  are  bred  and  born  internationalists, 
and  they  have  done  their  best  to  work  to  the  spirit  of  their  old 
traditions,  but  the  time  has  come  when  the  cry  has  gone  forth  from 
our  members — from  those  who  have  lost  their  lives,  and  the  women 
and  the  children  they  have  left  behind — that  never  again  will  we 
meet  these  men  in  the  old  friendly  way.  The  6,000  murdered  men 
who  lie  at  the  bottom  of  the  sea,  with  their  sightless  eyes  staring 
at  us  in  our  dreams,  are  a  reminder  of  the  foul  deeds  that  have  been 
committed  by  the  Germans,  and  these  victims  of  barbarous  brutality 
make  mute  but  effective  appeal  to  us,  their  friends  and  survivors, 
to  reject  with  scorn  the  suggestion  that  we  should  meet  the  country- 
men of  those  who  have  thus  requited  the  faithfulness  of  our  com- 
rades to  the  highest  traditions  of  the  sea.  The  Seamen's  Union 
has  done  a  good  deal  for  the  international  movement,  but  as  a  man 
who  has  eaten  their  bread,  and  has  lived  their  life,  and  will  share 
the  death  they  have  died,  I  solemnly  declare  in  this  Congress  that 


22  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

the  seamen  of  this  country  will  absolutely  refuse  to  take  part  in 
any  movement  with  these  men,  and  that  they  will  decline  to  carry 
delegates  to  any  conference  with  which  they  are  associated. 

This  last  was  a  threat  which  in  the  course  of  time  the  sailors 
carried  out. 

"Have  you  heard  the  story  of  the  Belgian  Prince?"  asked  J. 
Havelock  Wilson,  president  of  the  Sailors  and  Firemen,  who  at- 
tacked the  Parliamentary  Committee,  significantly  enough,  also,  for 
including  the  socialist  groups  in  their  proposed  congress: 

Have  you  heard  the  story  where  they  discarded  the  lifeboats, 
took  ofif  the  life-belts,  and  submerged  the  ship?  And  yet  some  of 
you — [here  the  speaker  broke  down,  amid  the  sympathetic  silence  of 
the  Congress] — and  yet  some  of  you  would  be  content  to  meet  these 
men  !  You  would  take  the  blood-stained  hands  of  murderers  within 
your  own !  .  .  . 

I  took  every  precaution  to  bring  to  the  notice  of  the  organized 
workmen  of  Germany  what  our  men  have  suffered.  I  was  turned 
down.  So  you  can  quite  understand  the  attitude  of  the  seamen. 
Yet  you  would  ask  the  government  to  withdraw'  from  the  position 
they  have  taken  upon  this  question  and  to  issue  passports  for  this 
conference  at  Stockholm.  That  is  to  say,  you  are  willing  to  throw 
upon  the  British  seamen  the  responsibility  of  refusing  to  carry 
those  who  were  going  to  meet  our  murderers.  Well,  the  seamen 
will  not  hesitate  to  accept  that  responsibility.  We  will  never  carry 
these   men. 

One  policy  the  seamen  will  pursue.  We  have  got  to  teach  Ger- 
many a  lesson.  Germany  is  a  nation  gone  wrong  from  top  to  bot- 
tom. .  .  . 

The  case  could  not  have  been  put  more  poignantly.  Later  on 
this  Blackpool  Congress  of  191 7  passed  a  resolution  roundly  con- 
demning the  "barbarous  practices  employed  by  enemy  submarine 
commanders"  and  calling  on  the  "working  class  forces"  of  the 
Central  Empires  to  "use  every  effort  in  order  to  guarantee  that 
all  methods  and  means  of  life-saving  should  be  utilized  when  mer- 
chant tonnage  is  sunk."  British  labor  as  a  whole  later  called  for 
reparation  for  seamen  and  passengers  who  had  gone  down  in  ships 
sunk  in  violation  of  international  law  and  for  rigorous  inquiry  and 
judgment  on  the  violators. 

But,  on  the  issue  lying  back  of  this  question  of  atrocities  (cast 
here  in  terms  of  fellow  workers  murdered  at  sea),  when  the  vote 
was  taken  at  Blackpool,  the  majority  in  favor  of  the  resolution 
setting  going  the  procedure  for  an  international  meeting  was  as 
31  to  I.     J.  Cotter  of  the  Ship  Stewards  (7,000  members),  who, 


THE  BRITISH  TRADES  UNION  CONGRESS  23 

after  the  Lusitania  was  sunk  by  a  German  submarine,  had  gone 
down  to  identify  the  bodies  of  "my  own  shipmates  who  were  con- 
cerned in  that  great  tragedy,"  was  one  of  those  who  spoke  in  its 
favor  and  in  reply  to  Wilson;  Ben  Tillett  of  the  dockers  (47,000 
members)  was  another.  R.  Williams  of  the  Amalgamated  Laborers 
(6,000  members)  voiced  the  attitude  of  the  radicals: 

I  join  with  Mr.  Clynes  and  Mr.  Thomas  in  saying  that  no  words 
of  mine  can  adequately  convey  the  respect  I  have  for  the  seamen 
of  this  country.  We  are  told  that  it  is  not  possible  or  desirable 
that  the  representatives  of  Great  Britain  shall  confer  with,  and 
shake  hands  with,  the  representatives  of  the  German  working  classes. 
The  case  of  the  seamen  is  really  good  on  its  sober  official  side,  but 
if  and  when  the  circumstances  required  such  a  step  to  be  taken, 
your  shipowners  would  have  no  hesitation  in  using  the  services  of 
the  German  prisoners  of  war  to-day. 

I  have  accompanied  Wilson  and  Henson  and  Cotter  to  the  Ad- 
miralty and  the  Board  of  Trade,  and  time  and  time  again  we  have 
protested  against  the  damnable  iniquity  of  the  British  shipowners 
employing  Lascars  and  Chinamen.  I  have  in  my  office  the  protests 
of  men  who  have  had  their  ships  sunk  under  them  two  or  three 
times,  and  they  have  been  told  that  there  is  no  work  for  them  because 
the  shipowners,  in  their  search  for  more  and  more  profits,  have 
replaced  them  with  Chinese  and  Lascars.  I  can  quote  from  Mr. 
Wilson's  own  letters  on  this  subject,  which  are  now  lying  at  my 
office.  ...  I  can  see  that  the  whole  of  Europe  is  going  to  be  one 
seething  mass  of  discontent  among  the  workers  after  the  war,  and 
I  want  this  trade  union  movement,  on  its  own  horny-handed  side, 
to  bestir  itself  and  take  its  proper  position  in  the  International.  .  .  . 

Many  of  our  politicians  and  the  press  will  join  in  acclaiming  the 
statements  made  by  President  Wilson  from  time  to  time,  and  Presi- 
dent Wilson  has  said  that  the  world  must  be  made  safe  for  democ- 
racy. Then  I  say  that  democracy  alone  can  accomplish  the  task. 
Are  you  not  smarting  under  the  taunt  of  the  Cecils,  who  have  the 
bluntness  to  express  the  mind  of  the  governing  class  concerning  you? 
The  diplomats  are  striving  by  underhand  overtures  to  compose  a 
peace  satisfactory  to  themselves,  and  I  am  assured  upon  unquestion- 
able authority  that  this  war  is  no  different  from  other  wars.  These 
men  will  carry  on  their  secret  machinations.  From  the  disclosures 
in  the  newspapers  this  morning  you  will  find  that  intrigue  was  going 
on  in  1901,  1904  and  1905  between  the  Hohenzollerns  and  others 
against  this  country.  It  is  time  that  we  put  an  end  to  this  damnable 
witches'  cauldron.  Kings  have  gone  already,  and  we  are  told  that 
the  Kaiser  must  go.  Then  I  say,  praise  God  when  there  will  be 
a  notice  "to  let"  outside  Buckingham  Palace ! 

J.  Bromley,  secretary  of  the  Locomotive  Firemen  &  Engineers 
(34,000  members),  followed  with  this: 


24  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

It  is  all  right,  Mr.  Chairman  and  fellow  delegates,  to  sugges^^ 
that  we  cannot  shake  hands  with  "the  bloody  Germans,"  not  yet ;  bi  f^ 
if  we  fail  in  this  great  movement  to  recognize  the  one  essentia 
factor  that  it  is  not  the  working  class  of  this  country  or  of  Germany, 
or  any  other  country,  who  have  caused  this  war,  or  are  now  making 
it  continue,  we  shall  never  get  a  right  perception  of  the  problem 
that  faces  us,  or  find  a  solution  of  it.  I  think,  if  I  may  say  so,  that 
it  is  surprising  to  many  of  us  that  this  great  movement  of  ours,  and 
even  our  supposedly  intelligent  leaders,  are  losing  sight  of  that 
fact.  We  are  acting  upon  the  same  principle  that  operates  in  the 
case  of  a  couple  of  dogs  who  are  thrown  in  the  pen  to  fight  each 
other,  or  when  cocks  are  put  into  the  cockpit.  In  our  blind,  unrea- 
soning passion,  we  are  fighting  each  other  at  the  behest  of  other 
people.  We  appear  to  be  as  ignorant  of  the  real  issue  as  the  dogs 
in  the  pen  or  the  cocks  in  the  cockpit.  We  have  got  to  turn  upon 
the  people  outside  who  are  setting  us  at  each  other's  throats.  When 
we  do  that,  we  shall  say,  not  in  the  ambiguous  language  of  this 
report  from  the  Parliamentary  Committee,  but  straightforwardly  as 
Britishers,  that  if  we  do  not  now  meet  these  Germans,  by  the  time 
we  do  wake  up  to  it,  it  will  be  too  late  for  any  useful  purpose.  That 
is  the  position. 

But  at  Blackpool  the  preponderance  of  argument  on  inter- 
allied and  inter-belligerent  meetings  had  swung  to  the  affirmative 
side;  it  was  no  longer  espoused  by  lone  spokesmen,  and  it  was  the 
big  moderate  leaders  who  this  year  met  the  issue  as  raised  by  the 
seamen. 

Said  J.  H.  Thomas,  secretary  of  the  National  Union  of  Rail- 
waymen  (341,000  members),  who  had  come  to  America  the  spring 
before  as  a  member  of  the  British  Mission  to  give  American  labor 
and  employers  the  benefit  of  English  experience  in  girding  for  war: 

I  am  first  going  to  submit  that  there  is  no  delegate  in  this  hall 
who  could  listen  unmoved  to  the  case  of  the  Seamen ;  and  nobody 
knows  better  than  Wilson  and  Henson  that  there  are  many  of  us 
who  disagree  profoundly  with  their  particular  view  who  are  not 
wanting  in  their  admiration  for  the  magnificent  heroism  of  the 
seamen  of  these  islands.  But,  after  all,  this  is  a  congress  repre- 
sentative of  labor;  and  if  it  were  true  that  the  war  could  be  settled 
and  peace  could  be  declared  by  English  and  Germans  not  meeting — 
as  Mr.  Wilson  says — then  there  would  be  indeed  great  force  in  his 
argument.  But  he  knows  perfectly  well  that  if  the  war  were  to  go 
on  for  another  twenty  years,  there  must  come  a  time  when  a  meet- 
ing of  some  kind  will  have  to  take  place.  ...  In  the  second  place, 
there  is  no  difference  of  opinion  in  our  movement  with  respect  to 
the  proposition  that  when  peace  is  discussed  the  views  of  labor 
should  be  effective.  We  all  know  that  all  the  horrors  of  this  war — 
that  the  germs  of  this  war — are  to  be  found  in  previous  patched-up 


THE  BRITISH  TRADES  UNION  CONGRESS  25 

peaces.  Every  war  has  been  the  result  of  an  inconclusive  peace, 
and  a  peace  in  which  the  common  people  of  the  worid  were  never 
consulted.  Therefore,  we  say  to  this  congress  that  with  all  the  sac- 
rifices which  labor  has  made,  with  the  magnificent  response  in  life 
and  treasure  that  they  are  giving  daily,  are  we  not  justified  in 
assuming  that  the  great  labor  movement  is  anxious  that  when  peace 
has  to  be  discussed,  labor's  voice  must  be  heard;  and  it  must  be  the 
people's  peace,  and  made  by  the  people.  .  .  . 

Said  J.  R.  Clynes,  M.P.,  of  the  General  Workers  (164,000  mem- 
bers), who  twelve  months  later  was  to  become  food  controller  of 
the  British  Isles: 

We  were  all  deeply  moved  by  the  eloquence  and  emotion  of  the 
speeches  of  the  two  men  who  represent  the  Sailors'  and  Firemen's 
Union  in  the  opposition  to  this  resolution ;  and  we  feel  that  they 
spoke  as  trade  union  leaders  whose  members  have  suffered  in  a 
special  degree  from  the  murderous  methods  of  modern  German  war- 
fare. We  can  assure  Mr.  Wilson  and  his  union  that  they  have  the 
deepest  sympathy  of  the  trades  union  movement ;  but  we  also  want 
him  to  ask  his  members  to  regard  the  war  situation  now  as  something 
even  greater  than  the  loss  which  his  union  has  suffered,  and  higher 
than  the  feeling  of  indignation  which  naturally  now  moves  his  col- 
leagues and  himself.  .  .  . 

.  .  .  Until  we  find  an  immense  change  in  German  opinion  from 
the  official  spokesmen,  a  conference  with  the  German  people  would 
be  folly.  If  it  took  place,  you  can  well  imagine  what  would  happen. 
I  can  trace  my  attendance  to  the  first  international  conference  back 
to  the  days  of  my  youth,  when,  some  20  years  ago,  I  attended  Zurich; 
and,  in  the  corner  of  the  room,  I  saw  men  with  knives  in  their  pos- 
session. I  was  present  at  the  recent  conference  of  Allies  in  London, 
and  again  I  saw  a  great  difference  of  opinion  between  us.  What  is 
the  use  of  compelling  these  men  to  meet  together?  You  only  compel 
them  to  make  an  exhibition  before  the  labor  and  socialist  forces  of 
the  world.  You  compel  them  to  enter  the  conference  in  the  form 
of  an  inglorious  row  that  can  do  no  good  to  the  labor  movements 
or  to  the  common  interests  of  us  all.  .  .  , 

I  believe  the  Parliamentary  Committee  is  now  putting  forward  a 
proposal  which  is  not  merely  based  upon  a  mature  discussion  of 
opposing  points  of  view  but  also,  and  more  particularly,  upon  the 
experience  of  the  past  few  weeks.  They  have  seen  that  it  is  no 
use  having  an  artificial  and  forced  conference.  .  .  . 

Derby:  1918 

Thomas,  Clynes,  Henderson — the  names  will  recur  again  in  suc- 
ceeding chapters  when  we  find  them  as  the  organizers  of  the  great 
moderate  central  strength  of  the  British  Labour  Party  in  its  war 


26  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

and  peace  offensive,  just  as  they  occurred  again  at  the  meeting  of 
the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  at  Derby,  in  September,  191 8, 
when  they  met  and  routed  a  determined  effort  to  undermine  that 
offensive  by  antagonistic  forces  in  British  public  life — forces  which 
sought  to  split  the  Trades  Union  Congress  on  the  international 
issue  through  such  spokesmen  for  the  policy  of  non-intercourse  as 
Gompers  of  America  and  Hughes  of  Australia,  and  which  sought  to 
split  the  pclitical  labor  movement  by  starting  a  purely  trade  union 
party  (with  the  socialist  elements  left  out)  in  opposition  to  the 
British  Labour  Party.  At  Derby  ^  we  find  Havelock  Wilson  holding 
a  great  mass  meeting  for  the  sailors  and  their  wrongs,  designed  to 
play  into  both  moves,  but  when  it  came  to  the  Congress  itself,  we 
find  it  standing  again  shoulder  to  shoulder  with  the  British  Labour 
Party;  find  Thomas  and  Thome  mover  and  seconder  of  a  resolu- 
tion which  reaffirmed  the  policies  set  going  at  Blackpool  the  year 
before. 

But  Derby  takes  the  chronicle  beyond  the  period  dealt  with 
in  this  chapter — up  to  the  close  of  191 7 — which,  between  Birming- 
ham and  Blackpool,  saw  the  shift  in  labor  sentiment  from  right  to 
left  in  the  great  British  Trades  Union  Congress. 

'  See  Chapter  XVIL 


CHAPTER    IV 

BRITISH  LABOR  UNITED  ON  WAR  AIMS 

Late  in  the  session  at  Blackpool,  Henderson,  speaking  as  fra- 
ternal delegate  from  the  Labour  Party,  personified  the  issues  of 
foreign  policy  before  the  Trades  Union  Congress;  and  the  official 
report  records  that  he  was  welcomed  there  (September,  191 7),  less 
than  a  month  after  his  enforced  retirement  from  the  War  Cabinet, 
"with  a  warmth  of  demonstration  almost  without  precedent  in  the 
history  of  those  gatherings." 

He  said  in  part: 

The  Labour  Party  welcome  most  enthusiastically  the  recom- 
mendations set  out  in  the  resolution  relating  to  the  development  of 
the  work  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee.  The  possibility  of  the 
mother  of  congresses  taking  her  proper  place  in  the  ever-increas- 
ingly  important  work  in  the  international  field  of  politics  is  one  that 
must  be  viewed  with  keen  satisfaction  by  all  true  friends  of  the 
labor  movement.  If  I  may  be  permitted  to  say  so,  I  join  with  the 
delegate  who  spoke  earlier  in  the  week,  and  say  emphatically  that 
it  has  been  to  the  impoverishment  of  international  politics  that 
this  congress  has  not  taken  a  larger  share  in  the  work  in  days 
gone  by.  .  .  . 

I  believe,  sir,  that,  so  far  as  the  future  is  concerned,  a  properly 
organized  and  thoroughly  representative  working-class  international 
movement  will  not  only  make  military  wars,  but  economic  wars, 
well-nigh  an  impossibility.  And  who  would  dispute  the  essential 
need  of  such  a  force,  especially  when  we  remember  the  bitter  expe- 
rience through  which  we  have  gone  in  the  past  three  years?  If  we 
had  such  a  force,  it  would  be  the  finest  expression  of  a  League  of 
Nations  that  could  be  imagined,  because  it  would  be  a  League  of 
the  Common  Peoples  throughout  the  whole  civilized  world.  I  do 
not  mind  confessing — though  possibly  some  advantage  will  be  taken 
of  the  confession — that  the  indispensable  necessity  to  this  desirable 
state  of  affairs  is  the  destruction,  the  complete  destruction,  of 
absolute  government,  with  its  Kaisers  and  its  Czars,  to  be  replaced 
by  a  free  democracy.  Is  it  too  much  to  say  that  this  great  world 
conflict,  which  has  entailed  such  tremendous  sacrifices  in  blood, 
treasure,  and  effort,  could  only  be  finally  successful — and  I  empha- 
size that  word  "finally,"  for  I  am  afraid  that  some  people  mistake 
the  military  victory  for  the  final  and  complete  success — could  only 
be   finally   successful   when   autocratic   government  has  been   com- 

27 


28  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

pletely  and  forever  destroyed  ?  May  I  say— though  the  position  may 
not  commend  itself  to  all  of  you — that  this  is  the  great  reason  why 
I  would  rather  consult  with  the  German  minority  before  peace  than 
1  would  with  the  representatives  of  a  discredited  autocratic  govern- 
ment when  a  military  victory  has  been  secured? 

I  do  not  challenge  one  word  of  the  magnificent  speech  made  by 
the  leader  of  the  American  delegation  this  morning  in  what  he  said 
in  regard  to  some  of  the  German  socialists;^  but  I  think  we  should 
be  fair  to  our  comrades,  and  we  ought  to  be  especially  fair  to  a 
minority,  and  more  particularly  to  a  minority  that  has  had  to  labor, 
because  of  its  conscience,  under  the  peculiar  difficulties  which  the 
German  socialist  minority  has  had  to  contend  with — and  has  nobly 
contended — during  the  past  three  years.  Take  the  position  of  Lieb- 
knecht — Liebknecht,  Bernstein,  Haase,  and  others  of  the  small  group 
that  stood  together  in  spite  of  militarism  of  their  own  nation.  They 
have  stood  aloof  from  their  own  government,  and  have  done  what 
little  they  could  to  thwart  the  base  designs  of  their  government. 
Therefore,  much  as  we  may  deplore  the  attitude  of  the  majority, 
let  us  give  honor  where  honor  is  due.  ... 

The  promoters  of  the  Stockholm  conference  in  Great  Britain 
were  prepared  to  leave  the  settlement  of  the  peace  conditions  to  the 
governments,  who  alone  are  responsible  to  the  entire  nation ;  but  we 
of  all  classes  have  suffered  so  much — and  which  amongst  us  at  these 
tables  has  not  got  lying  beneath  the  sod  a  son  or  some  one  else  who 
was  near  and  dear  to  us? — we  belong  to  the  class  which  has  given 
the  most  and  suffered  most,  and  we  shall  not  allow  this  matter  to 
rest  in  the  hands  of  diplomatists,  secret  plenipotentiaries,  or  poli- 
ticians of  the  official  stamp,  unless  they  are  prepared  to  have  some 
regard  for  the  opinion  of  the  common  people. 

Delegates  wielding  in  all  3,400,000  votes  attended  the  special 
conference  at  Central  Hall,  Westminster,  December  23,  191 7,  at 

^  Two  fraternal  delegates  of  the  American  Federation  spoke.  James 
Lord  of  the  United  Mine  Workers  of  America,  and  John  Golden,  of  the 
Textile  Workers,  both  of  the  old  school  of  labor  leadership  in  the  States. 
A  paragraph  from  the  latter's  address  will  put  the  point  of  their  remarks : 

"I  question  whether  there  is  any  country  in  the  whole  wide  world 
where  the  voice  of  labor  would  not  have  been  raised  in  protest  if  the 
government  participated  in  the  cruelties  which  the  German  government 
have  participated  in.  And  there  is  only  one  of  two  things.  The  German 
labor  movement  is  either  in  sympathy  with  those  cruelties,  or  they  are 
moral  cowards  in  not  expressing  their  disapproval.  There  must  be  a 
reckoning;  and  we  believe,  in  our  American  way,  that  there  is  only  one 
thing  to  do,  and  that  is  to  defeat  the  German  first  and  then  try  to  talk 
to  him  afterwards." 

A  different  message  was  brought  by  David  Rees  in  behalf  of  the 
Trades  and  Labo.ur  Congress  of  Canada,  who  complimented  the  gathering 
for  being  "big  enough  to  accept  the  truce  of  the  Parliamentary  Com- 
mittee." and  expressed  himself  as  favoring  an  international  conference 
"as  speedily  as  possible." 


BRITISH  LABOR  UNITED  ON  WAR  AIMS  29 

which  as  a  result  of  the  initiation  at  Blackpool,  the  war  aims 
memorandum  framed  jointly  by  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of 
the  Trades  Union  Congress  and  the  Executive  Committee  of  the 
Labour  Party  was  submitted.^  There  was  a  letter  from  the  Premier, 
assuring  the  delegates  that: 

A  statement  in  regard  to  the  war  aims  of  the  Allies  can,  of  course, 
only  be  made  in  agreement  with  the  other  nations  who  are  fighting 
in  alliance  together  in  the  war. 

The  question  of  issuing  a  fresh  joint  declaration  on  this  subject 
is  one  which  is  constantly  kept  in  view  by  the  Allied  governments, 
but  it  is  not  one  about  which  it  is  possible  for  the  British  govern- 
ment to  speak  by  itself.  We  had  looked  forward  to  an  interchange 
of  views  on  this  subject  with  the  delegates  appointed  by  the  Russian 
government  to  attend  the  conference  held  in  Paris  last  month,  but 
to  our  regret  the  absence  of  any  representatives  of  Russia  at  that 
conference  made  any  such  consultation  impossible.  ,  .  . 

To  my  mind,  the  ideals  for  which  we  are  fighting  to-day  are  pre- 
cisely the  same  as  those  for  which  the  British  Empire  entered  the 
war. 

We  accepted  the  challenge  thrown  down  by  Prussia  in  order  to 
free  the  world  once  and  for  all  from  the  intolerable  menace  of  a 
militaristic  civilization,  and  to  make  possible  a  lasting  peace  by 
restoring  the  liberty  of  the  oppressed  nationalities,  and  by  enforcing 
respect  of  those  laws  and  treaties  which  are  the  protection  of  all 
nations,  whether  great  or  small. 

Within  a  few  days  following  this  conference,  Lloyd  George  had 
reversed  himself  in  the  matter  of  a  distinctly  British  formulation 
of  aims;  at  a  meeting  with  labor  he  came  across,  without  waiting  for 
the  Allies,  in  a  document  far  more  explicit  than  any  hitherto  put 
out.  But  up  to  the  period  of  the  armistice,  ten  months  later,  no 
joint  statement  was  forthcoming.  Henderson  countered  at  the  time, 
in  moving  the  adoption  of  the  memorandum,  by  saying  (the  quota- 
tions are  in  the  indirect  wording  of  the  news  report  of  the  London 
Times) : 

Faith  in  brute  force  as  an  ideal  instrument  for  attaining  national 
ambitions,  whether  right  or  wrong,  must  be  destroyed.  In  order 
to  make  the  world  safe  for  democracy  the  peace  settlement  must 
contain  all  the  conditions  and  safeguards  essential  to  the  future  life 
and  national  development  of  free  peoples,  be  they  large  or  small. 
Secret  diplomacy,  compulsory  military  service,  profit  from  the  manu- 
facture of  the  instruments  of  destruction,  should  be  rendered  unnec- 
essary in  a  society  of  free  nations.  This  is  the  great  spiritual 
change  which  working-class  organizations  are  especially  concerned 

*  Appendix  I. 


30  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

to  secure  by  any  peace  settlement.  The  bond  of  a  nation  must  be 
given  to  the  settlement  by  the  people,  for  that  is  the  only  way  in 
which  the  civilization  of  the  future  can  be  provided  vi'ith  the  safe- 
guards and  guarantees  that  will  be  adequate  and  effective.  .  .  . 

May  I  remind  the  conference  that  in  July  last,  on  my  return 
from  Russia,  I  said  that  until  there  had  been  a  definite  restatement 
of  war  aims  and  some  prospect  of  an  international  conference  it 
was  doubtful  whether  the  Russian  army  and  the  majority  of  the 
moderate  socialists,  on  whom  so  much  depended,  would  give  of  their 
best  for  the  successful  prosecution  of  the  war?  Can  it  be  doubted 
that  the  ignoring  of  the  warning  thus  given  contributed  to  the  pres- 
ent awful  Russian  disaster? 

Take  the  question  of  the  League  of  Nations.  President  Wilson 
and  the  American  people  are  very  much  interested  in  this  proposal; 
in  fact  it  would  be  no  exaggeration  to  say  that  America  is  fighting 
for  little  if  anything  else.  Yet  this  is  the  very  moment  chosen  by 
Sir  Edward  Carson  (some  hissing)  and  a  section  of  the  press  to 
treat  that  proposal  with  scorn  and  contempt. 

And  of  the  general  situation: 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  remind  this  conference  that  the  war 
is  running  far  into  the  fourth  year.  Each  day  makes  its  further 
demands  of  sacrifice,  destruction  and  death.  The  impoverishment 
of  the  world  in  the  unprecedented  losses  of  life,  property  and  mate- 
rial continues.  The  engines  of  destruction  are  multiplied  and  science 
is  applied  for  the  purposes  of  death  and  not  for  promoting  the  cre- 
ative and  constructive  functions  of  life.  The  world  is  stunned  and 
appalled  by  these  grievous  losses,  and  a  crushed  and  bleeding  human- 
ity desires  to  know  if  the  continuance  of  this  tragedy  is  essential 
to  a  just  and  lasting  peace.  We  all  of  us  recognize  that  the  evil 
effects  of  Germany's  policy  of  aggressive  militarism  and  world  domi- 
nation must  be  destroyed,  that  Germany's  autocracy  must  give  place 
to  a  German  democracy,  that  militarism  not  only  in  Germany,  but 
universally  (loud  cheers)  must  be  forever  discredited,  and  that 
adequate  provision  must  be  made  to  maintain  peace  among  the  free 
democracies  of  the  world  by  the  establishment  of  a  complete  league 
of  democratic  nations.  We  all  recognize  that  all  dishonorable  and 
unjust  ambitions  or  world  domination,  whether  they  be  military, 
political,  or  commercial,  must  be  renounced  by  every  nation. 

There  was  an  effort  from  the  extreme  right,  by  Havelock  Wil- 
son of  the  Sailors  and  Firemen  (55,000  members)  to  have  the 
memorandum  rejected.  Wilson  recounted  again  the  deliberate 
murders  at  sea;  denounced  the  procedure  as  a  covert  effort  to  drive 
those  "men  out  of  the  government  who  were  representing  labor,  to 
suit  their  own  selfish  purposes  and  policy;"  and  said  that  his  answer 
to  the  question,  "What  are  our  war  aims?"  was  "Get  on  with  the 


BRITISH  LABOR  UNITED  ON  WAR  AIMS  31 

war."  And  there  was  an  effort  from  the  extreme  left,  by  E.  C. 
Fairchild  of  the  British  Socialist  Party,  to  refer  back  a  passage 
reaffirming  the  resolve  to  fight  until  victory  was  achieved,  as,  he  said, 
it  had  "become  abundantly  clear  that  victory  in  the  old  military 
sense  could  never  be  secured  by  the  continuance  of  the  war." 
Wilson  was  voted  down  by  a  show  of  hands,  25  to  i,  and  Fairchild 
without  counting.  An  effort  was  made  by  Stephen  Walsh,  M.P., 
on  behalf  of  the  Lancashire  and  Cheshire  Miners'  Federation,  to 
postpone  action  for  a  month  on  the  ground  that  many  branches 
had  not  had  opportunity  to  consider  the  memorandum.  This  was 
disputed  by  Robert  Smillie,  president  of  the  National  Federation 
of  Miners,  and  defeated. 

The  new  majority  showed  their  strength  in  the  vote — 2,132,000 
to  1,164,000;  and  it  will  serve  to  quote  two  of  their  spokesmen. 
J.  Hill  (Boilermakers,  76,000  members),  in  seconding  Henderson's 
motion,  in  behalf  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  which  he 
was  vice-chairman,  contrasted  labor's  proposals  with  the  plans  of 
the  "Paris  economic  conference  for  bottling  up  certain  nations  by 
tariffs,"  and  concluded: 

The  memorandum  in  your  hands  points  a  peaceful  and  consti- 
tutional path  to  sanity,  justice,  and  democracy.  This  conference  is 
the  first  step  towards  the  reconciliation  of  the  workers  of  all  lands. 

I  have  been  in  as  many  industrial  wars  as  most  men  of  my  age. 
I  have  had  employers  to  deal  with  who  were  to  me  as  brutal  as 
Kaiser  Bill  (Cheers).  But  at  no  stage  in  these  fights  have  I  at 
any  time  refused  to  negotiate,  to  meet  my  enemies,  and  to  settle,  if 
a  settlement  were  possible.  I  advocate  the  same  policy  in  interna- 
tional affairs.  I  supported  voluntary  recruiting.  My  members  (the 
Boilermakers)  in  far  too  large  numbers  volunteered.  My  own  four 
sons  all  left  work  of  national  importance  to  take  their  place  in  the 
fighting  line.  I  have  given  thousands  of  voluntary  hours  to  our 
government  to  help  in  the  organization  of  war  work.  But  I  have 
never  forgotten  that  there  is  a  more  excellent  way  than  war  for  the 
settlement  of  disputes,  and  I  am  honored  to  share  in  presenting 
this  memorandum,  believing  that  it  is  the  first  step  in  offering  a 
reasoned  solution  of  this  world-tragedy. 

Said  J.  H.  Thomas  (National  Railwayman,  341,000  members): 

If,  as  they  said,  Germany  set  out  for  world  domination — as  he 
believed  she  did — and  if  she  believed  in  the  power  of  militarism, 
would  the  acceptance  of  that  document  be  a  triumph  for  Germany? 
If  they  were  in  a  position  to  say  through  the  working  classes  of  all 
countries,  "Here  is  a  fair,  just  and  honorable  peace,"  and  if  Ger- 
many was  in  the  position  to  accept  it,  they  would  have  achieved  their 


32  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

object.     But,  if  she  was  not,  then  they  must  fight  on  to  secure  it, 
because  they  believed  that  it  was  right.  .  .  . 

They  were  not  hoisting  the  white  flag.  They  were  not  neglecting 
their  duty  and  their  responsibility  to  those  whom  they  represented; 
but  they  were  mindful  that  their  country,  and  all  the  countries,  were 
being  bled  white.  (Hear,  hear.)  They  were  not  out  to  crush 
German  militarism  and  substitute  English  militarism  in  its  place. 
(Hear,  hear.)  They  were  out  to  crush  militarism  in  all  forms,  in 
all  countries,  because  when  they  had  crushed  militarism  they  had 
crushed  the  real  germ  that  caused  all  wars.  They  could  only  do  that 
by  declaring  clearly  and  definitely  that  just  as  our  hands  were  clean 
in  1914,  they  were  clean  to-day,  and  that  our  aims  were  equally  pare. 
But  they  would  not  be  if  they  were  going  to  have  Paris  resolutions, 
if  they  were  going  to  have  an  economic  war  to  provide  the  germs 
for  future  war.  It  was  only  by  a  league  of  nations,  standing  four- 
square, that  they  could  defeat  militarism  in  all  forms;  and  then  their 
message  would  be,  not  to  our  own  people,  not  to  the  Allied  people, 
but  to  the  workers  of  the  world — "United  to  save  the  world  for  the 
future  of  the  people." 


CHAPTER    V 

THE   I.    L.   P.   AND   THE   LEFT 

Just  as  we  turned  from  the  substantial  Trades  Union  Congress 
to  the  more  fluid  Labour  Party  to  gauge  the  currents  affecting  Brit- 
ish labor,  so  to  get  closer  to  the  sources  of  the  new  working  class 
feeling  we  must,  in  sequence,  turn  to  the  well  springs  of  the  Inde- 
pendent Labour  Party,  which  was  founded  in  1893  by  Keir  Hardie. 

Radical,  fearless,  small  in  numbers — 35,000  before  the  war; 
50,000  at  its  close — these  opportunists  had  been  as  rabidly  attacked 
in  the  past  by  the  more  rigid  socialists  for  their  want  of  class  bit- 
terness as  they  were  attacked  by  the  forces  of  privilege  for  their 
arraignment  of  the  existing  order.  They  and  like  minded  radicals 
had  been  forerunners  in  setting  issues,  which  later  became  the 
watch  words  of  the  whole  labor  movement,  through  the  pages  of 
such  papers  (barred  from  oversea's  mails  during  war  time)  as  the 
I.  L.  P.'s  Labour  Leader,  George  Lansbury's  ^  Herald,  the  Glasgow 
Forward  and  the  Merthyr  Pioneer.  The  I.  L.  P.  had  been  fore- 
runners in  seeing  and  seizing  upon  the  political  power  of  labor 
and  had  their  group  in  Parliament  long  before  the  Labour  Party 
was  organized  by  a  committee  of  the  Trades  Union  Congress.  They 
were  forerunners  in  that  linking  of  workers  "by  hand  or  by  brain" 
which  has  this  last  year  been  the  basis  for  expansion  of  the  British 
Labour  Party,  and  their  mixed  membership  has  been  a  leaven  in 
the  larger  body.  Before  the  war,  they  were  forerunners  in  recog- 
nizing labor's  interests  in  foreign  relations  and  had  affiliations  in 
the  International  Socialist  Bureau,  independent  of  the  affiliation  of 
the  Labour  Party.  And,  during  the  war,  they  had  been  forerunners 
for  peace,  pressing  for  some  of  the  elements  in  the  united  war- 
aims  program  at  a  time  when  the  rank  and  file  of  labor  was  wholly 
unaroused  to  them.  They  had  a  hand  in  a  radical  conference  at 
Leeds  in  June,  191 7,  which  hailed  the  Russian  revolution  and  sub- 

'  George  Lansbury,  for  example,  years  ago  staked  his  seat  in  the  Com- 
mons on  the  suffrage  issue  and  lost;  only  to  run  again  (and  lose  again) 
in  the  December  elections  (1918),  at  which,  with  the  passage  of  time, 
thousands  of  English  women  voted  under  a  franchise  given  them  by  the 
very  elements  which  years  before  sent  him,  as  he  phrased  it,  "out  into  the 
wilderness." 

33 


34  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFr'ENSIVE 

scribed  to  the  soviet  formula  of  "peace  without  annexations  or  in- 
demnities, based  on  the  rights  of  nations  to  decide  their  own  affairs." 
This  conference  advocated  the  establishment  of  Workmen's  and  Sol- 
diers' Councils  on  the  Russian  model  and  its  delegation  to  Russia 
in  the  early  days  of  the  Revolution  was  stalled  by  the  action  of  the 
government  and  the  sailors'  union. 

At  London  on  August  lo,  191 7,  when  the  Labour  Party  was 
at  length  swinging  over  to  an  amended  Stockholm  conference,  Philip 
Snowden,  M.P.,  chairman  of  the  I.  L.  P.,  expressed  its  impatient 
temper  to  take  part  on  its  own  and  to  go  to  lengths  unendorsed  by 
the  new  majority.    He  said: 

The  minority  representatives  who  go  to  Stockholm  .  .  ,  will  not 
be  tongue-tied  by  the  views  of  any  majority.  We  shall  go  there 
to  say  that  this  slaughter  has  gone  on  quite  long  enough.  We  shall 
go  there  to  say  that  it  was  not  the  peoples  but  the  governments  that 
made  the  war.  We  shall  go  there  to  say  that  in  the  last  three  years 
governments  have  been  unable  to  settle  this  war,  and  finally,  we 
shall  go  to  say  that  those  whose  incapacity  has  been  made  so  mani- 
fest should  no  longer  have  the  power  to  gamble  with  the  lives  of 
the  people,  that  the  time  has  come  when  the  democracies  of  all  the 
nations  shall  rise  and  say  that  this  is  not  a  question  for  a  nation, 
it  is  not  a  question  for  allies,  it  is  a  question  for  the  people,  and 
the  people  now  shall  take  the  settlement  of  this  question  into  their 
own  hands. 

In  its  earlier  activities  as  to  foreign  policy,  the  Independent 
Labour  Party  had  thus  operated  outside  the  great  labor  formations 
which  were  not  yet  ready,  and  it  was  now  prepared  to  go  entirely 
beyond  the  new  majority  in  the  positions  it  espoused.  But  it  had 
steadily  maintained  its  regularity  in  domestic  affairs  as  a  constit- 
uent member  of  the  Labour  Party.  It  had  sought  to  get  its  own 
people  nominated  in  the  preliminary  canvasses,  but  had  supported 
the  regular  nominees  when  chosen.  The  opposite  course  was  selected 
by  the  British  Workers'  League,  one  of  the  new  off-shoot  organiza- 
tions of  war  time,  headed  by  Victor  Fisher,  a  member  of  the  old 
Social  Democratic  Party,  ranging  itself  at  every  point  on  the 
extreme  "right,"  and  apparently  in  close  affiliation  with  the  govern- 
ment labor  group.  The  League  not  only  attacked  the  Labour 
Party  after  its  war  aims  pronouncements  in  December,  191 7,  but 
announced  that  it  would  nominate  candidates  for  Parliament  in 
opposition  in  some  constituencies.  When  this  matter  was  brought 
to  the  attention  of  three  well-known  labor  leaders  who  had  lent 
their  names  to  the  league,  they  resigned,  and  at  the  Nottingham 
convention  (January,  1918)  it  was  the  general  sentiment  that  all 


THE  I.  L.  P.  AND  THE  LEFT  35 

members  of  the  Labour  Party  should  get  out  of  the  league  or  out  of 
the  party.  They  could  not  serve  both.  Robert  Smillie  called  the 
British  Workers'  League  on  the  floor  of  the  convention  at  Notting- 
ham a  "black-leg  organization,"  and  in  doing  so  he  brought  down 
the  house. 

We  secured  testimony  of  what  the  shift  in  sentiment  in  the 
rank  and  file  meant,  in  terms  of  the  workers  of  one  great  industry, 
and  as  one  of  the  outspoken  leaders  of  the  Left  saw  it,  in  a  state- 
ment by  Robert  Smillie,  president  of  the  Lanarkshire  Miners' 
Union  (Scotland),  president  of  the  Miners'  Federation  of  Great 
Britain  (800,000  members),  and  chairman  of  the  Triple  Alliance  of 
Railway  Men,  Transport  Workers  and  Miners.  His  position  had 
been  much  more  consistent  than  that  of  Henderson,  Thomas  and 
others,  with  whom  he  made  common  cause  in  the  new  "labor  offen- 
sive"; but  was  much  more  extreme.  With  the  "swing  toward  the 
left,"  it  had  to  be  reckoned  with  more  and  more  in  estimating  the 
trend  of  British  working  class  opinion. 

Said  Robert  Smillie  at  Nottingham  in  January,  1918,  at  the  turn 
of  the  year: 

It  might  be  said  that  during  the  first  two  years  of  this  war 
the  mine  workers  of  the  counti'y  were  probably  the  strongest  in  their 
devotion  to  the  government  in  its  policies  and  in  their  enthusiasm 
for  the  war.  They  always  opposed  and  voted  against  conscription, 
but  accepted  it  with  other  measures  as  they  came  along.  But  as 
mining  was  made  an  exempted  industry,  it  did  not  fall  on  them  hard. 

Now,  I  feel  sure,  not  only  could  it  be  said  that  their  enthusiasm 
has  been  seriously  dampened,  but  to  a  great  extent  it  has  gone  out 
altogether.  .  .  . 

I  think  the  feeling  is  now  with  the  majority  of  the  workers  of  the 
country  that  a  satisfactory  and  lasting  peace  could  be  secured  by 
negotiation  betv/een  the  Allies  and  the  central  powers.  The  feeling 
is  strongly  held  by  the  majority  that  a  peace  could  have  been  secured 
by  negotiation  twelve  months  ago,  had  it  not  been  for  the  imperial- 
istic aims  of  the  ruling  and  government  classes  in  the  Allied  countries 
and,  of  course,  in  Germany  and  Austria. 

I  am  speaking  now  for  what  I  believe  to  be  the  majority  and, 
more  important,  the  more  active  and  rebellious  section.  Their  view 
of  a  settlement  is  that  this  war  will  ultimately  be  settled  by  negotia- 
tion and  not  by  a  military  victory  on  either  hand — and  that  hunger 
in  the  belligerent  nations  and  the  lack  of  supply  of  men  will  be  the 
deciding  factors  in  bringing  this  about.  If  this  view  is  a  correct 
one,  then  it  follows  that  it  must  be  also  correct  that  negotiations 
ought  to  take  place  now  rather  than  twelve  months  hence,  when 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  men  of  all  the  nations  whose  lives  might 
be  saved,  will  have  been  wiped  out. 

This  mining  county  of  Nottingham  may  be  taken  as  one  of  the 


36  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

most  backward  in  Great  Britain.  From  the  advanced  labor  and 
political  points  of  view,  it  has  always  been  considered  reactionary 
and  the  home  of  liberalism  and  liberal-laborism,  as  opposed  to  inde- 
pendence. It  is  now  showing  a  wonderful  movement  of  a  revolu- 
tionary character.  My  own  action  as  president  of  the  Miners' 
Federation  of  Great  Britain,  in  holding  as  I  do  strong  views  in 
opposition  to  the  unnecessary  continuance  of  the  war,  was  the  sub- 
ject of  severe  criticism  at  branch  meetings  of  the  miners  in  Notting- 
hamshire earlier  in  the  war.  On  invitation  of  the  Miners'  Associa- 
tion I  have  addressed  three  mass  meetings  this  past  week.  At  the 
one  held  last  night,  there  were  in  attendance  considerably  over  two 
thousand  men  and  women.  There  were  some  railway  workers  pres- 
ent, but  the  men  were  chiefly  miners.  At  these  meetings  every  refer- 
ence to  an  early  settlement  of  the  war  by  negotiation,  every  reference 
to  the  building  up  of  the  International  at  the  earliest  possible  moment 
after  the  war,  every  statement  that  liberalism  and  conservatism,  the 
old  political  parties,  should  be  thrown  aside  and  all  classes  of  the 
democracy  unite  together  in  the  building  up  of  a  people's  party, 
perform  their  own  government  and  carry  on  the  affairs  of  the  na- 
tion, in  the  interest  of  the  democracy — was  cheered  to  the  echo. 

I  should  like  to  add  that  from  very  wide  experience  in  public 
meetings  I  am  simply  amazed  at  the  enthusiasm  shown.  I  feel  cer- 
tain that  eighteen  months  ago  I  should  not  have  been  allowed  to 
deliver  those  speeches  here.  I  find  that  this  change  in  temper,  gen- 
erally speaking,  applies  to  every  district  in  which  I  have  been  dur- 
ing the  past  few  months.  Though  it  is  well  known  everywhere  what 
my  views  are,  and  that  I  have  been  and  am  in  direct  opposition 
to  the  vast  majority  of  the  national  trade  union  leaders  of  the 
country,  I  am  receiving  hundreds  of  letters  from  branch  trade 
unions  and  local  trade  and  labor  councils  to  address  meetings. 

The  rank  and  file  of  the  workers  are  changing  their  minds  far 
more  rapidly  upon  the  question  of  the  necessity  for  pushing  in  the 
direction  of  an  early  peace  than  are  the  old  leaders.  I  am  con- 
vinced that  the  pressure  from  the  rank  and  file  will  within  a  very 
short  time  force  a  change,  if  not  in  the  opinions  at  least  in  the  ex- 
pressions of  many  of  the  leaders  of  the  trade  union  movement. 

There  will  not  be  this  change  in  Scotland  or  Wales,  because  in 
those  two  countries  the  men  have  been  anxious  for  peace  negotia- 
tions for  a  considerable  time.  The  same  thing  may  be  said  of 
Northumberland.  But  the  change  which  I  have  described  as  taking 
place  in  Nottingham  is  going  forward  in  Durham,  Yorkshire,  Staf- 
fordshire and  Derbyshire. 

I  have  watched  the  change  in  my  own  county  (Lanarkshire)  and 
there  it  is  very  marked.  Two  years  ago,  though  I  am  a  trusted  and 
favorite  servant  of  the  men,  and  they  would  not  like  to  do  anything 
that  would  seem  to  injure  or  offend  me,  I  remember  that  in  our 
conferences  the  vast  majority  of  the  delegates  were  fight-to-the- 
finish  and  knock-out-blow  men.  I  have  watched  the  change  care- 
fully, and  I  venture  to  say  that  the  question  of  the  earliest  possible 


THE  I.  L.  P.  AND  THE  LEFT  37 

peace  by  negotiation,  without  annexation  or  indemnity,  would  be 
carried  in  Lanarkshire  ahnost  to  a  man.  There  is  certainly  a  strong 
feeling  in  the  districts  of  the  county  and  in  the  conferences  where 
the  branch  delegates  meet  against  any  more  men  being  taken  from 
the  mines.  The  feeling  is  that  peace  could  be  secured  if  the  British 
government  were  anxious  to  brin^  about  an  early  settlement  of  the 
war. 

The  first  cause  of  this  change  has  been  a  natural  one.  We  have 
been  three  and  a  half  years  in  the  most  terrible  war  ever  seen. 
Every  village  has  its  widows  and  orphans, — and  mothers  who  have 
lost  their  sons.     There  is  undoubtedly  a  war  weariness. 

Then  the  greed  of  the  capitalist  class  and  the  profiteers  has  been 
another  fruitful  cause  for  bringing  the  people  to  look  for  peace- 
And  the  hideous  mistakes  which  have  undoubtedly  been  made,  the 
blunders  by  some  of  our  higher  commands  which  have  meant  the 
useless  slaughter  of  so  many  of  the  rank  and  file — Gallipoli,  Mesopo- 
tamia and  the  latest  at  Cambrai — have  added  to  the  causes.  These 
have  all  tended  to  make  people  tired  of  the  thing;  the  food  shortage, 
women  and  children  standing  in  queues  have  added  to  it. 

But  probably  the  chief  cause  of  the  change  which  has  taken  place 
in  the  minds  of  our  people  has  been  that  they  have  come  to  find  out 
through  recent  revelations  in  Russia  that  to  a  very  great  extent  we 
were  misled  at  the  outbreak  of  the  war,  that  we  have  not  been  in 
it  solely  because  Belgium  was  invaded,  but  that  there  are  many  other 
factors.  Our  capitalist  classes  and  great  armament  firms  and  the 
jingo  imperialists  with  their  greed  for  new  lands  to  exploit  and 
develop — a  greed  common  to  Russia,  Germany,  Austria,  Italy,  France 
and  ourselves — they  were  all  in  it — were  desirous  of  laying  their 
hands  on  the  possessions  of  other  more  primitive  peoples.  When  you 
recall  how  Russia  and  ourselves  divided  Persia,  how  Germany  wished 
for  Bagdad  and  we  sought  to  prevent  it — out,  all  of  us,  for  mineral 
resources  and  oil — those  were  the  real  causes.  And  there  is  now  an 
extraordinary  number  of  our  workpeople  that  are  reading  those  facts 
and  spreading  them  among  their  fellows.  Our  people,  in  growing 
numbers,  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  so  far  as  the  working 
people  of  Germany  are  concerned  they  are  pretty  much  the  same  as 
ourselves,  and  there  is  no  real  cause  for  war  between  us.  I  must 
admit  that  to  me  it  has  been  rather  amazing  that  all  the  efforts  of 
the  jingo  imperialistic  press  to  get  up  a  bitter  hatred  against  the 
German  and  Austrian  people  amongst  the  workers  of  this  country 
have  utterly  failed.  There  is  a  hatred  of  the  Junker  and  military 
class  of  Germany,  and  there  is  a  growing  bitterness  against  the  same 
class  in  our  own  country.  Our  people  to  a  very  great  extent  believed 
that  the  very  strength  of  the  German  military  machine  was  proof 
that  she  was  preparing  for  years  for  an  attack  on  her  near  neigh- 
bors. But  now,  from  the  information  that  has  leaked  out,  our  people 
are  realizing  that  Germany's  great  preparations  may  have  been 
caused  by  her  fear  that  combinations  and  preparations  outside  her 
own  borders  made  it  inevitable  that  she  should  prepare  for  a  com- 


38  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

bined  attack.  The  difificulty  has  been  that  up  to  the  present  time 
the  governments  of  the  opposing  nations  have  managed  to  make  their 
own  peoples  believe  that  they  are  fighting  a  defensive  war  and  not 
one  of  aggression.  That  is  the  reason  why  working-class  opinion 
has  not  been  more  strongly  expressed.  If  we  can  prove  to  the  Ger- 
man people  that  the  democracy  of  this  country  is  not  out  to  smash 
Germany  as  a  nation  and  cut  off  Germany  from  free  commerce  with 
the  rest  of  the  world — if  we  can  prove  that  we  are  out  to  rebuild  the 
world  nationally  and  internationally  on  lines  of  brotherhood  and 
lasting  peace — if  we  can  prove  to  them  that  our  ultimate  aims  are  in 
keeping  with  the  proposals  of  the  best  of  the  Russian  revolutionists, 
for  the  final  establishment  of  the  cooperative  commonwealth,  and 
the  rights  of  the  people  of  all  the  nations  to  govern  themselves  in 
their  own  way,  I  have  great  hope  of  a  strong  and  hearty  response 
from  the  German  people.  If  they  did  not  respond,  I  at  least  should 
be  sadly  disappointed  and  should,  I  think,  have  to  change  absolutely 
my  views  of  them. 

Once  we  get  our  allies  to  accept  labor's  war  aims  (or  peace  aims, 
as  I  prefer  to  call  them)  we  must  manage  to  put  them  before  the 
representatives  of  the  German  and  Austrian  democracy.  If  we  then 
get  an  authoritative  statement,  representative  of  the  views  of  the 
German  socialists  and  trade  unionists,  that  they  are  not  prepared 
to  enter  into  negotiations,  but  are  prepared  to  stand  behind  their 
government  and  military  machine  until  the  Allies  are  conquered  and 
military  victory  secured  for  Germany,  then  I  feel  sure  there  would 
be  a  strong  and  almost  a  united  movement  amongst  the  people  of 
this  country,  that  we  must  fight  on  and  use  all  the  powers  we  possess 
in  what  would  then  be  a  defensive  war  against  unreasonable  and 
outrageous  opponents. 

Smillie's  interpretation  of  the  swing  to  the  left,  as  he  saw  it  in 
the  industrial  field,  was  matched  by  Ramsay  MacDonald's  in  the 
political  field.  In  an  interview  at  Nottingham  (January,  1918), 
MacDonald  said: 

The  first  thing  is  for  the  democracies  to  recognise  that  the  war 
is  a  political  event,  that  its  causes  cannot  be  removed  by  militarism 
in  any  shape  or  form — that  a  peace  upon  victory  may  only  accentuate 
the  dififerences  and  jealousies  and  the  sensitiveness  from  which  the 
war  sprang.  Therefore,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  democracies  to  ask  each 
other  directly,  what  it  is  that  went  wrong  with  Europe  before  1914. 
What  have  the  democracies  to  offer  to  solve  that  problem?  When 
they  approach  the  war  in  that  way,  several  things  are  quite  evident. 
The  first  thing  is  that  the  governments  apart  from  the  peoples  can't 
settle  anything.  .  .  . 

After  three  years,  the  Labour  Party  has  begun  to  see  that  that  is 
the  situation.  At  its  two  first  annual  conferences  after  the  war,  it 
decided  by  a  huge  majority,  against  the  Independent  Labour  Party's 
advice,  to  take  its  share  in  the  government.    It  then  believed  that  to 


THE  I.  L.  P.  AND  THE  LEFT  39 

support  the  government  was  to  support  the  nation.  It  has  now  come 
to  see  that  these  two  things  are  not  the  same,  and  at  Nottingham  it 
declined  to  pass  a  resolution  in  favor  of  its  members  remaining  in 
the  government/  but  decided  when  the  question  was  raised  to  make 
no  pronouncement  on  the  subject.  The  explanation  is  that  it  is 
developing  a  policy  of  its  own,  and  it  has  made  a  first  attempt  to 
embody  it  in  its  war  aims  memorandum.  .  .  . 

When  the  Russian  Revolution  broke  out,  the  reactionary  mind 
of  the  Cabinet  stood  revealed  in  the  half-hearted  declaration  made 
by  Mr.  Bonar  Law,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  when  he  was  forced 
to  welcome  the  new  government.  Just  so,  it  had  been  shown  a  few 
weeks  before  the  revolution  by  the  selection  of  Lord  Milner  to  go  to 
Petrograd  on  a  special  mission,  when  his  entire  lack  of  understanding 
of  the  popular  movement  that  then  had  almost  come  to  a  head  was 
shown  by  his  support  of  Czardom. 

To  relieve  the  situation,  thus  destroyed,  the  government,  without 
consulting  British  labor,  selected  a  deputation  to  go  to  the  Soviets. 
Professedly,  it  was  a  deputation  of  British  labor,  and,  though  the 
two  labor  leaders,  O'Grady  and  Thorne,  held  positions  in  trade  union- 
ism, their  qualifications  for  this  mission  were  that  they  were  blindly 
pro-government  and  made  speeches  on  the  most  approved  jingo 
lines.  This  deputation  alienated  the  Soviets  and  left  matters  still 
worse. 

Meanwhile,  Mr.  Henderson,  the  labor  member  of  the  War  Cab- 
inet, was  also  sent  out  and  after  a  bad  start  began  to  take  in  the 
situation;  but  this  only  brought  him  into  conflict  with  his  cabinet 
colleagues  at  home,  and  shortly  after  his  return  he  was  forced  to 
resign. 

I  know,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  that  when  Kerensky  became  the  head 
of  the  Russian  government  he  looked  upon  Mr.  Lloyd  George  as  his 
greatest  friend,  and  I  know,  also,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  that  as  the 
months  went  by  this  faith  evaporated.  The  great  shock  came  with 
Stockholm.  Kerensky  never  could  understand  why  a  democratic 
government  could  refuse  to  allow  leaders  of  public  opinion  known  to 
be  honest  and  responsible  to  confer  together.  But  when  not  only 
passports  were  refused  to  the  representatives  of  British  labor  (to 
French  and  American,  as  well),  but  when  Kerensky's  known  views 
in  favor  of  Stockholm  were  contorted  until  they  appeared  to  be 
antagonistic  to  the  conference,  Kerensky  felt  himself  deserted.  This 
series  of  events  explains  how  confidence  went  by  the  board. 

What  I  have  said  about  the  working  class  movement  generally,  I 
can  say  with  still  more  force  regarding  my  own  constituency.  Of 
course,  when  war  broke  the  floodgates  of  anger  and  misrepresenta- 
tion were  opened  on  every  one  who  took  my  position — had  there 
been  an  election  I  should  have  lost  my  seat.  I  had  three  meetings 
broken  up.  In  every  case  it  was  by  a  handful  of  organized  people 
or  by  soldiers  sent  down  by  the  Canadian  pay-office  in  London.     In 

'  It  declined  also  to  pass  one  calling  them  out,  as  likely  to  interfere 
vvith  the  prosecution  of  the  war,     (See  page  45.) 


40  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

one  or  two  other  instances  when  attempts  were  made  to  break  up  a 
meeting,  the  interruptors  were  ejected  and  government  pro-war 
meetings  broken  up  in  return.  I  have  had  votes  of  confidence  in  me 
passed  by  every  labor  political  organization  in  the  constituency. 
Last  Sunday,  in  Leicester,  6,000  people  tried  to  come  into  a  hall 
that  held  2,000.  This  can  be  tested  in  another  way:  when  the  war 
broke  out  the  membership  of  the  Leicester  Independent  Labour  Party 
was  650;  now  it  has  2,200. 

At  the  outset  of  the  war,  Ramsay  MacDonald,  then  leader  of 
the  parliamentary  labor  group,  staked  his  career  on  opposing  Brit- 
ain's entry  into  the  war,  attacking  Grey's  handling  of  foreign 
policy.  John  Burns,  liberal-labor,  like  John  Morley,  an  uncom- 
promising liberal,  dropped  out  of  the  government  and  of  public 
life,  on  the  same  issue,  and  it  looked  as  if  MacDonald  would  expe- 
rience the  same  fate.  He  was  the  object  of  unstinted  and  personal 
abuse.  Henderson  and  other  pro-war  labor  leaders  came  to  the 
front,  entered  the  government,  stood  for  conscription  and  the  other 
war  policies,  and  helped  Lloyd  George  in  back-firing  the  revolu- 
tionary outburst  in  the  congeries  of  ship-building  and  engineering 
works  on  the  Clyde. 

Throughout  the  earlier  war  years,  MacDonald,  because  of  his 
immense  personal  popularity,  had  been  retained  as  treasurer  of  the 
Labour  Party.  He  was  renominated  at  Nottingham  by  nineteen 
labor  unions,  national  and  local,  nine  labor  councils,  and  twenty- 
six  local  labor  parties,  committees  and  leagues,  with  no  competing 
nominations  whatever.  But  for  more  than  the  first  half  of  the 
war  his  stand  on  the  war  issues,  along  with  that  of  Philip  Snowden, 
W.  C.  Anderson,  F.  W.  Jowett  and  others,  made  these  Independent 
Labour  Party  leaders  seemingly  almost  as  hopeless  a  minority  in 
the  Labour  Party  itself  as  they  were  in  Parliament.  MacDonald, 
Snowden  and  Lansbury  are  always  sure  of  a  demonstrative  wel- 
come from  a  labor  audience.  This  is  because  they  have  carried  on 
a  lonely  fight,  and  the  Briton  loves  a  game  fighter,  and  because 
they  have  suffered  in  the  cause  of  labor.  But  their  more  extreme 
views  were  not  the  views  of  the  central  majority  group.  Clynes, 
Thomas  and  Henderson  won,  when  it  came  to  votes  and  policy. 
The  heart  of  labor  was  moved  to  these  minority  leaders  of  the  left, 
while  the  head  of  labor  refused  to  be  convinced  by  the  whole  of 
their  peace  policy. 

At  the  parting  of  the  ways  in  August,  19 17,  the  government 
labor  faction  led  by  Barnes  and  Roberts  on  the  extreme  right, 
and  the  extreme  left  of  the  I.  L.  P.  led  by  Snowden,  broke  with 
the  clear  majority.  But  the  power  of  party  regularity,  stronger  even 
in  labor  politics  than  out,  held  them  all  in  line,  and  the  great  center 


THE  I.  L.  P.  AND  THE  LEFT  41 

massed  behind  the  new  tactics.  Picture  the  line-up  in  American 
football.  The  backs  shifted  their  tactics  from  the  right  end  to 
between  tackle  and  guard  on  the  left.  Thus  by  the  close  of  191 7, 
the  radicals  gave  fire  and  urgency  to  the  new  formation.  The 
more  conservative  leaders  still  stood  to  the  positions  taken  for 
three  years,  but  many  of  them  put  their  weight  into  the  interna- 
tional program  which  the  rank  and  file  had  laid  hold  of  with  a 
fervor  which  can  only  be  compared  with  the  feel  of  a  labor  group 
in  the  midst  of  a  great  strike. 


CHAPTER    VI 

THE   NOTTINGHAM   MEETING 

Quickened  by  these  developments,  the  British  Labour  Party 
went  into  annual  session  at  Nottingham  on  January  23,  1918. 

In  a  way,  the  Nottingham  meeting  originated  nothing,  brought 
nothing  to  a  head.  It  merely  affirmed  the  war  aims  which  the  two 
great  British  labor  formations  had  agreed  to  in  December,  and 
which  were  to  receive  the  sanction  of  Allied  labor  and  socialist 
groups  at  the  London  conference  in  February  [page  67].  Its  plans 
for  party  reorganization,  which  had  engrossed  much  of  the  time  of 
the  executive  in  recent  months  in  anticipation  of  a  general  election, 
were  held  over  until  a  special  convention,  also  in  February  [page 
105].  The  tentative  draft  of  its  political  platform.  Labour  and  the 
New  Social  Order,^  in  a  sense  recapitulated  the  resolutions  on  in- 
ternal policy  adopted  at  the  preceding  annual  session  at  Man- 
chester. This  was  presented  at  Nottingham,  not  for  adoption,  but 
for  reference  to  the  constituent  organizations  in  advance  of  a  party 
conference  in  June  [page  125]. 

Nevertheless,  the  Nottingham  meeting  gathered  up  all  these 
strands  into  the  cordage  of  its  organized  purpose  and  easily  may 
come  to  be  looked  back  upon  as  the  outstanding  labor  gathering 
of  the  war  in  England.  Some  of  its  characteristics  may  well  be  set 
down  here,  as  a  cross  section,  if  you  will,  of  the  British  labor  move- 
ment as  a  whole,  master  type  of  the  uncounted,  lesser  meetings 
which  led  up  to  it,  meetings  of  local  and  national  unions,  meetings 
of  city  and  district  federations.  The  delegates  responded  to  spir- 
ited idealism  from  the  speakers'  platform.  Again  and  again,  some 
fiery  radical  from  a  back  row  would  stir  them  into  cheers.  They 
responded  less  exuberantly,  perhaps,  but  none  the  less  just  as  spon- 
taneously to  homely  challenges  to  fair  play  and  to  common  sense. 
They  threw  open  their  doors  to  the  representative  of  the  Russian 
Bolshevik!  and  acclaimed  the  revolution;  heard  him  rail  at  the 
"moderates,"  and,  "moderates"  themselves,  nine-tenths  of  them, 
the  delegates  went  on  about  their  solid  business  in  a  solid  way. 

As  a  political  convention,  the  thing  which  most  impressed  the 
American  observer  was  the  pains  taken  to  provide  for  the  deliberate 

'  Appendix  IV. 

42 


THE  NOTTINGHAM  MEETING  43 

consideration  of  policy.  Under  the  rules  every  constituent  organ- 
ization had  been  obliged  to  forward  to  headquarters  the  resolutions 
it  had  to  offer.  All  these  had  been  sent  out  from  headquarters  to 
all  the  constituent  organizations,  so  that  both  the  resolutions  thus 
offered  and  amendments  thereto  by  other  labor  bodies  were  in 
hand  in  advance  of  the  convention  itself.  The  whole  batch  was 
classified,  published  in  a  forty-four  page  agenda  and  distributed 
at  the  first  session.  Representatives  of  such  constituent  organiza- 
tions as  had  offered  resolutions  or  amendments  on  any  one  sub- 
ject, on  the  Ministry  of  Health,  for  example,  or  on  the  Soldiers' 
Charter,  were  asked  to  meet  together  in  committee  and  endeavor 
to  reach  a  joint  draft.  This  in  turn  was  printed  forthwith  and 
distributed  to  the  delegates  on  the  day  for  discussion  of  the  subject. 
As  already  noted,  the  proposal  for  party  reorganization  was 
put  over  for  a  full  month  to  give  the  constituent  organizations  time 
to  debate  it;  the  draft  of  the  party  program,  for  six  months.  In 
the  current  temper  of  the  public  toward  queues  outside  the  bakers' 
shops  and  meat  markets,  there  was  naturally  bitter  attack  upon  the 
government's  handling  of  the  food  question,  both  in  resolutions 
sent  in  and  on  the  floor.  But  when  J.  R.  Clynes,  M.P.,  the  labor 
member  of  the  food  administration,  turned  the  tables,  charged 
the  unions  with  failing  to  cooperate  in  the  local  councils  and  put 
it  up  to  them  to  work  out  a  better  scheme,  he  carried  his  audience 
with  him. 

Thus,  all  through  the  conference,  sympathy  for  the  oppressed 
of  all  nations  and  "grousing"  against  abuses  at  home  were  some- 
how or  other,  in  true  British  psychology,  consistent  parts  of  a  mat- 
ter-of-fact grappling  with  practical  things.  The  old  watch-cri'es 
against  capitalistic  excesses  had  their  customary  echoes,  yet  th^ 
impression  abided  that  here  was  developing  something  different 
both  from  rigid  continental  socialism  and  from  the  old  trade  union- 
ism— something  organic,  national,  British. 

Indeed,  the  pre-war  preachers  of  class  hatred  were  conspicuous 
by  their  absence.  The  old-line  Socialists  in  England  had,  in  truth, 
been  split  by  the  great  war  into  two  groups,  both  of  them  com- 
paratively small  in  numbers. 

One  group,  the  British  Socialist  Party,  was  fairly  analogous  in 
its  direct  opposition  to  the  war  to  the  stand  taken  by  the  American 
Socialist  Party  at  St.  Louis,  just  prior  to  our  entry  into  the  war. 
Its  offices  were  raided  by  the  government  in  January,  and  litera- 
ture was  confiscated  that  it  had  planned  to  distribute  at  the  Not- 
tingham meeting  of  the  Labour  Party.  The  other  group,  including 
some  of  the  most  extreme  antagonists  of  the  social  order,  merely 
crossed  off  "class"  and  wrote  in  "race"  in  the  matter  of  their  feel- 


44  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

ings  and  anathemas  and  became  readily  enough  a  race-hatred,  jingo 
section— the  National  Socialist  Party— which,  unlike  the  Labour 
Party,  made  no  distinction  between  the  German  government  and 
the  German  people.  Its  resolution  declaring  against  any  interna- 
tional conference  "so  long  as  the  Germans  occupy  the  territories 
they  have  seized  and  carry  on  their  campaign  of  murder,  outrage 
and  piracy,"  was  heavily  defeated  at  an  inter-Allied  conference  in 
London  on  August  21,  191 7.  Its  position  was  fairly  analogous  to 
that  assumed  by  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  once  the  United 
States  itself  became  a  belligerent. 

In  contrast,  there  was  a  very  evident  resurgence  of  feeling  of 
working  class  brotherhood  at  Nottingham,  and  the  fraternal  dele- 
gates from  Allied  countries  were  made  to  feel  by  the  applause 
which  followed  their  speeches  that  the  things  in  common  were 
bigger  than  the  things  in  difference. 

More,  the  delegates  began  with  singing  Connell's  familiar  "Red 
Flag,"  which  was  distributed  by  The  Herald.  They  did  not  balk 
nor  turn  a  hair  at  the  second  stanza,  which  runs: 

Look  round — the  Frenchman  loves  its  blaze; 
The  sturdy  German  chants  in  praise; 
In  Moscow's  vaults  its  hymns  are  sung; 
Chicago  swells  the  surging  throng. 

They  sang  it  with  the  unction  of  a  Progressive  Party  rally  singing 
"Onward,  Christian  Soldiers,"  but  with  this  difference:  they  knew 
the  words,  and  with  one  accord  they  gave  the  full-throated  chorus 
for  a  seventh  and  last  time  at  its  close,  singing  it  standing,  heads 
up,  in  a  great  rolling  bass: 

Then  raise  the  scarlet  standard  high! 
Within  its  shade  we'll  live  or  die; 
Tho'  cowards  flinch  and  traitors  sneer, 
We'll  keep  the  red  flag  flying  here. 

From  the  gallery,  before  they  had  sat  down,  the  call  came  for 
three  cheers  for  the  Russian  revolution.  They  were  given.  Three 
cheers  for  the  Austrian  working  class  strike  (then  on).  They  were 
given.  Three  cheers  for  peace.  Given  with  three  times  the  volume 
of  the  others.  A  further  call  from  the  gallery  for  three  "boos"  for 
the  labor  "comb-out"  raised  more  of  a  laugh  than  a  cheer  from 
the  assembly. 

As  they  sat  down,  the  observer  endeavored  to  size  up  these 
people  who  had  been  singing  socialist  songs  and  cheering  peace 
in  wartime.    This  was  not  what  New  Yorkers  call  a  "Cooper  Union 


THE  NOTTINGHAM  MEETING  4$ 

crowd."  A  day  or  so  later  at  the  headquarter's  hotel,  one  member 
of  the  government  labor  delegation  that  was  later  sent  to  America 
pointed  with  a  flip  of  his  thumb  at  a  party  of  long-haired,  thin- 
cheeked  agitators  at  a  nearby  table;  there  was  a  girl  with  them 
with  bobbed  hair  and  a  socialist  minister  in  black.  "And  they  talk 
of  that  kind  being  the  government,  eh?"  he  scoffed.  But  this  hall- 
full  of  labor  delegates  were  predominantly  of  another  sort,  with 
wrists  as  thick  as  his  own,  and  with  sons,  like  his,  in  the  trenches. 
It  was  made  up  largely  of  men  forty  years  old  or  older.  There 
were  a  dozen  bald  heads  in  the  first  five  rows,  for  example,  and  as 
many  polls  of  gray  hair — perhaps  a  third  of  the  fifty  men  who  sat 
in  them.  And  speaker  after  speaker  who  got  up  in  the  course 
of  the  three  days'  proceedings  came  to  mind  a  few  days  later  when 
one  of  the  leading  English  economists  said  in  a  matter-of-fact 
way  that  there  were  in  the  Labour  Party  more  men  of  capacity  and 
experience,  fitting  them  for  responsibility  and  leadership  in  seeing 
England  through  the  reconstruction  period,  than  in  either  the  coali- 
tion government  or  the  Liberal  Party. 

At  the  Nottingham  meeting,  for  the  first  time,  the  labor  move- 
ment clearly  demarked  itself  from  the  coalition  government,  as  a 
party  of  opposition  if  events  so  developed,  but  rather,  for  the  pres- 
ent and  for  the  future,  as  a  party  of  affirmative  proposal.  Its 
Labour  and  the  New  Social  Order '^  was  its  charter  for  the  recon- 
struction period;  its  Labour  War  Aims^  its  international  program. 
Eight  labor  leaders  were  members  of  the  Lloyd  George  minis- 
try; Barnes  a  member  of  the  War  Cabinet.  But  while  the  vote 
of  the  conference  was  against  demanding  their  withdrawal  on  ques- 
tions of  policy  (Henderson  in  person  leading  the  opposition  to  the 
demand,  on  the  ground  that  it  might  embarrass  the  government  in 
the  prosecution  of  the  war),  there  was  no  hiding  the  satisfaction  in 
the  corridors  over  trouble  two  of  them  were  having  in  their  con- 
stituencies, and  there  was  general  approval  of  Henderson's  state- 
ment that  never  again  would  he  be  a  member  of  a  government  in 
which  labor  was  not  in  a  majority. 

At  the  Nottingham  meeting,  also,  the  swing  of  the  labor  move- 
ment toward  the  "left"  in  the  matter  of  foreign  policy,  as  the 
outcome  of  the  three  war  years,  stood  out  as  an  accomplished  fact. 

The  underlying  situation  was  the  subject  of  various  interpreta- 
tions. Nottingham,  in  January,  1918,  the  week  of  the  meeting, 
presented  the  customary  look  of  an  old  industrial  town,  a  textile 
center  superimposed  upon  a  mining  district.  There  were  few  young 
men  abroad.    Working  girls  streamed  to  the  mills  in  the  mornings, 

^Appendix  IV. 
^Appendix  II. 


46  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

young  girls  in  numbers  which  indicated  that  they  must  have  been 
recruited  from  other  communities. 

At  night  there  were  cheap  shows  a-plenty.  A  war  loan  cam- 
paign with  its  big  bulletin  boards  created  more  of  a  stir  than  the 
labor  meeting.  It  brought  crowds  of  girls  and  middle-aged  folk 
to  the  public  square  at  noon,  very  different  from  the  omnipresent 
khaki  clad  youth  of  central  London;  drab  crowds,  lit  up  only  here 
and  there  by  the  occasional  uniforms  of  men  on  leave,  by  the 
over-all  blue  and  bright  red  ties  of  convalescent  soldiers,  and  by 
picturesque  window  washers  with  their  ladders ;  girls,  these,  in  khaki 
pantaloons,  who  seemed  to  enjoy  the  glances  that  followed  them  as 
they  threaded  from  one  sidewalk  group  to  another.  Agents  of  the 
British  Workers'  League  passed  out  sheets  among  them  denouncing 
the  British  Labour  Party — and  at  the  other  extreme,  at  the  confer- 
ence hall,  other  agents  passed  out  copies  of  The  Herald,  challeng- 
ing the  government  on  the  issue  of  the  secret  treaties  and  giving 
news  of  railway  unions  whose  officers  had  refused  to  go  on  the 
government  sight-seeing  junkets  to  the  front, — of  Irish  developments, 
— of  the  mistreatment  of  conscientious  objectors, — of  local  labor 
demonstrations  at  a  dozen  points  fanning  strikes  to  force  peace 
negotiations — copies,  also,  of  Sylvia  Pankhurst's  Dreadnought, 
which  apparently  was  at  one  with  the  Bolsheviki  in  its  program 
for  immediate  industrial  action  to  stop  the  war. 

The  local  Nottingham  newspapers  interspersed  their  war  bul- 
letins with  customary  local  happenings — from  church  activities  to 
murder  mysteries.  Here  could  be  learned  the  participation  of  cer- 
tain of  the  labor  leaders  in  outside  meetings — from  Purdy  at  a 
patriotic  rally  and  Henderson  at  a  temperance  gathering  to  Smillie 
at  a  miners'  meeting  and  MacDonald  at  a  gathering  of  the  local 
I.  L.  P.  They  gave  up  columns  to  the  labor  meetings,  colored  after 
their  bent,  and  their  reporters  seemed,  if  anything,  impressed  with 
two  facts  more  than  others — that  here  was  a  national  meeting  which 
the  town  dignitaries  had  not  been  asked  to  open  formally,  and  one 
which  was  entirely  free  so  far  as  the  galleries  went,  without  ticket 
or  privilege,  to  whoever  came.  One  of  the  papers  voiced  the  con- 
demnation of  the  Tory  press: 

The  German  of  to-day  still  stands  out  as  the  most  fiendish  crea- 
ture upon  earth,  and  the  German  socialist  is  just  as  bad  as  the  man 
who  is  not  a  socialist.  In  Russia  a  gang  of  socialist  ruffians  have, 
for  the  moment,  obtained  power,  and  they  are  murdering  and  plun- 
dering every  one  who  stands  in  the  way  when  they  get  the  chance. 
This  is  exactly  what  they  did  in  Paris  many  years  ago.  Socialist 
methods  there,  as  elsewhere,  were  methods  of  murder  and  outrage, 
backed  up  by  lying  on  one  side,  and  by  unlimited  profession  of  fine 


THE  NOTTINGHAM  MEETING 


47 


motives  on  the  other.  And  to-day  we  have  the  curious  spectacle  of 
British  and  foreign  socialists  gathered  in  this  city  to  propound  afresh 
their  soul-destroying  principles.  The  most  striking  thing  about  the 
actions  of  these  people  is  their  amazing  effrontery  and  impudence. 
They  profess  to  speak  for  the  people  of  England.  They  profess  to 
be  able  to  stop  the  w^ar.  They  claim  to  know  more  about  it  than  any 
one  else,  and  they  misrepresent  notorious  facts  in  the  most  flagrant 
manner.  The  real  fact  is,  of  course,  that  they  are  oratorical  wind- 
bags, without  sense  or  knowledge,  who  have  permitted  themselves 
to  be  fooled  into  the  acceptance  of  ideas  that  are  false  from  begin- 
ning to  ending,  and  they  are  permitting  themselves  to  be  fooled,  also, 
by  abler  and  less  scrupulous  men  into  playing  the  German  game. 
For  the  time  being  socialists  have  ruined  Russia,  and  seem  deter- 
mined to  drench  that  unhappy  country  in  the  blood  of  its  own  people. 
Russian  socialists  will  not  fight  Germany,  but  they  have  no  hesita- 
tion in  turning  machine  guns  upon  honest  and  honorable  Russian 
people,  or  in  hiring  assasshis  to  murder  Russian  patriots.  English 
socialists  have  not  gone  so  far  as  this  as  yet,  but  it  is  only  necessary 
to  read  reports  of  some  of  the  speeches  delivered  in  Nottingham 
yesterday  to  see  that  English  socialists  are  traveling  in  the  same 
direction  as  their  Russian  fellows.  They  have  only  to  travel  a  little 
further  on  the  same  road  to  be  ready  to  crush  every  person  who 
disagrees  with  them  without  mercy.  And  what  have  socialists  to 
offer  us  in  exchange  for  the  conditions  they  wish  to  destroy?  Noth- 
ing but  a  German  victory  in  the  war,  and  a  dead  world  when  the 
war  is  ended. 

A  note  of  serious  apprehension  was  struck  that  week  by  the 
New  Statesman,  the  Fabian  review,  pro-war  from  the  beginning 
and  strongly  committed  to  the  war-aims  labor  program.  The  dele- 
gates were  full  of  enthusiasm  and  hope,  it  said,  for  the  general 
election  that  must  follow  the  passage  into  law  of  the  representa- 
tion-of-the-people  bill: 

But  over  them  all  lay  the  shadow,  not  only  of  war,  but  of  possi- 
ble impending  national  calamity.  A  large  number  of  these  delegates 
from  the  mine  and  the  railway,  the  shipyard  and  the  forge,  together 
with  the  officials  of  the  trades  unions  in  which  the  four  million  or- 
ganized workmen  are  enrolled,  brought  with  them  to  Nottingham  the 
news  of  industrial  unrest,  of  social  discontent  (acute  to  the  bursting 
point),  of  the  rank  and  file  locally  taking  momentous  decisions  into 
their  own  hands,  of  the  very  serious  possibility  of  sudden  and  spon- 
taneous industrial  disturbance.  These  men  are,  save  for  a  relatively 
insignificant  minority,  not  "pacifists."  They  have  just  declared,  as 
their  own  "War  Aims,"  terms  which  the  Prime  Minister  found  no 
great  difficulty  in  substantially  adopting  as  those  of  the  Allied  Powers. 
The  discussions  at  the  conference  showed  no  weakening  on  these 
terms,  and  revealed,   in  fact,  only  a  confirmation  of  the  desire  of 


48  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

British  Labor  to  stand  by  the  national  cause  as  British  Labor 
has  defined  it.  But  the  delegates  made  no  concealment  of  their  ap- 
prehensions that  the  grave  popular  discontent  with  the  proceedings 
of  Mr.  Lloyd  George's  government — with  its  continued  failure  to 
assure  to  the  people  their  daily  rations,  with  its  unexplained  hesi- 
tancy in  enforcing  any  real  equality  of  sacrifice  among  rich  and 
poor,  with  the  industrial  policy  of  the  Ministry  of  Munitions,  with 
the  imperious  tone  of  the  director  of  national  service,  with  the 
government's  breaches  of  faith — might  any  day  burst  into  a  flame 
which  the  industrial  leaders  and  officials  would  be  unable  to  repress. 
That  such  an  outburst  of  popular  discontent  with  what  is  regarded 
as  a  blundering  and  partial  administration  might  precipitate  what 
would  be  essentially  a  class  struggle,  in  which  forces  of  repression 
and  violence  would  be  evoked,  was  only  part  of  the  calamity  that 
was  feared.  It  is  due  to  these  workmen  to  record  that  their  greatest 
concern  was  as  to  the  possibly  disastrous  effect  of  such  a  struggle 
upon  the  national  cause. 

A  different  face  on  the  situation,  little  clouded  by  apprehen- 
sion, was  put  by  such  spokesmen  for  the  "left"  as  MacDonald  and 
Smillie;  rather  they  saw  it  overspread  by  the  flush  of  a  mounting 
working  class  purpose,  long  espoused  by  them  when  espousal  meant 
obloquy,  but  now  released  by  the  very  circumstances  which  in 
mid-winter  were  affecting  the  temper  of  all  England.  Only  as  that 
purpose  was  inhibited  or  thwarted  did  they  see  cause  for  appre- 
hension or  condemnation;  only  then,  as  they  saw  it,  would  those 
circumstances  make  for  national  disintegration  rather  than  for  a 
democratic  determinism. 

The  president  of  the  Nottingham  conference  was  W.  Frank 
Purdy,  of  the  Shipconstructors  and  Shipwrights  Association.  In 
the  course  of  his  presidential  address,  he  said: 

Do  the  peace  negotiations  between  Russia  and  the  central  em- 
pires show  that  Germany  is  willing  to  agree  to  the  formula  of  "no 
annexations  and  no  indemnities"  ?  The  military  party  in  Germany 
have  again  assumed  the  ascendancy.  Why?  Look  at  the  war  map  of 
Europe,  and  that  will  supply  the  reason.  The  Germans  hold  more 
territory  of  the  allies  in  1917  than  they  did  in  1915.  While  Germany 
still  occupies  these  territories,  a  peace  by  negotiation  would  be  inter- 
preted by  her  as  a  victory  for  herself  and  her  allies  and  would  fasten 
militarism  more  strongly  on  the  people  of  Germany  and  more 
strongly  on  the  people  of  the  British  empire  and  the  whole  world. 
It  might  bring  peace;  but  it  would  be  a  drawn  and  inconclusive 
peace  and  would  leave  future  generations  exposed  to  a  renewal  of 
this  terrible  carnage.  If  Germany  and  her  allies  are  not  willing  to 
declare  that  they  accept  the  principles  which  our  government  and 
the  President  of  the  United  States  have  now  published  to  the  world, 
then  we  must  fight  on.     No  other  course  is  left  open  to  us,  if  we 


THE  NOTTINGHAM  MEETING  49 

value  our  honor  as  a  nation  and  our  pledged  word  to  Belgium,  Serbia 
and  France.  We  owe  it  as  a  duty  to  those  who  have  made  the 
supreme  sacrifice,  and  to  those  who  have  been  disabled  in  the  war, 
to  carry  on  until  a  clean  peace  is  secured  which  will  enable  the 
peoples  of  the  world  to  live  in  security. 

The  tank  which  was  touring  the  English  provincial  towns  in 
the  interest  of  war  bonds,  was  in  Nottingham  the  week  of  the 
conference,  and  President  Purdy  was  a  speaker  at  one  of  the  noon- 
day meetings.  He  stood  at  one  end  of  the  new  working  majority, 
Smillie  and  MacDonald  at  the  other.  So  far  had  the  pendulum 
swung  that  the  I.  L.  P.  resolution  on  the  war,  which  would  have 
been  downed  at  the  annual  convention  a  year  before  at  Manchester, 
had  sufficient  votes  to  carry  it  at  Nottingham.  It  was  shelved  for 
the  sake  of  unity  with  the  Trades  Union  Congress  on  the  resolu- 
tions subsequently  adopted,  but  as  evidence  of  the  trend  of  feeling 
of  the  rank  and  file,  it  was  of  significance.    It  read: 

That  in  the  opinion  of  this  conference  the  war  marks  the  break- 
down of  the  old  method  of  diplomacy  which  settled  the  international 
relations  of  the  peoples  without  consulting,  or  even  informing  them; 
it  declares  that  in  the  past  the  failure  has  not  been  with  soldiers, 
but  with  statesmen,  who  have  used  victories  to  impose  terms  of  peace 
which  left  suspicion,  hate  and  resentment  behind,  which  were  fol- 
lowed by  military  alliances  and  armaments,  and  which  violated  the 
principles  of  self-government  in  order  to  satisfy  military  demands 
and  imperialist  appetites;  it  therefore  calls  upon  the  government,  if 
the  sacrifices  of  the  war  have  not  been  in  vain,  to  provide  for  the 
direct  representation  of  the  organized  democracy  in  every  conference 
which  discusses  the  conditions  of  peace,  to  reject  war  aims  which 
give  the  war  the  character  of  an  imperialist  venture,  and  to  use  its 
influence  and  authority  in  every  possible  way  to  remove  the  causes 
of  war ;  to  this  end,  the  conference  declares  that  no  obstacle  should 
be  put  in  the  way  of  responsible  representatives  of  labor  conferring 
together  with  a  view  to  arriving  at  such  an  understanding  upon  the 
problems  of  Europe,  as  will  receive  the  cooperative  support  of  all 
the  democracies,  without  which  there  can  be  no  lasting  peace. 

It  was  Arthur  Henderson  who  served  as  the  link  holding  to- 
gether the  various  elements  in  the  new  working  majority.  The 
swing  toward  the  left  would  have  gone  on  without  him.  As  a  mem- 
ber of  the  War  Cabinet,  he  was  losing  his  grip  on  the  labor  move- 
ment; his  dismissal  by  the  government  reinstated  him;  and  he 
had  the  adroitness  to  make  the  most  of  it  tactically,  the  keenness 
to  sense  the  shift  in  sentiment,  the  commonality  to  share  in  it,  and 
the  statesmanship  to  help  turn  the  unrest  and  mass  movement  of 
the  rank  and  file  into  a  constructive  program. 


so  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

Our  first  impression  of  him  was  unfavorable.  This  was  at  the 
Labour  Party  Headquarters  at  i  Victoria  Street,  before  the  Not- 
tingham conference,  when  he  responded  to  an  inquiry  with  a  bit 
of  a  formal  stump  speech,  such  as  he  must  have  given  a  hundred 
times.  But  on  the  platform  of  the  Nottingham  meeting  he  won 
entire  respect.  He  represented  the  Iron-founders  Society  as  a  trade 
unionist;  had  long  been  a  member  of  Parliament.  He  is  in  the 
fifties  and,  with  his  long  frock  coat,  his  neatly  slicked  hair,  the 
worn  but  firm  marking  of  his  face,  he  has  not  a  few  of  the  marks 
of  the  manual  worker  who  has  forged  to  the  front  either  in  busi- 
ness or  public  office,  in  church  ministry  or  in  labor  leadership.  Hen- 
derson has  figured  in  the  last  three.  He  is  a  rare  handler  of  men, 
with  an  old  parliamentarian's  trick  of  declaring  in  vehement  speech 
some  conservative  course.  He  came  out  of  every  tilt  on  the  floor 
of  the  convention  on  top,  including  one  with  no  less  formidable 
an  opponent  than  John  Hodge  of  the  Iron,  Steel  and  Kindred  Trades 
Association,  in  which  the  latter  publicly  apologized.  It  was  the 
same  when  the  attack  veered  from  the  extreme  right  to  the  extreme 
left.  An  English  social  worker  described  him  as  a  development 
over  any  English  labor  leader  in  the  past — in  the  fact  that  he  had 
the  sagacity  to  surround  himself  with  a  group  of  men  of  parts, 
both  from  the  ranks  of  labor  and  from  the  professions,  upon  whom 
he  drew  for  ideas  and  counsel.  Henderson's  own  contributions  to 
the  social  thinking  and  clear  utterance  that  was  going  forward  were 
by  no  means  the  least  of  the  group,  but  it  was  as  an  organizer 
that  his  powers  of  leadership  stood  out,  in  welding  an  as  yet 
invulnerable  labor  group  and  steering  it  successfully  away  from 
quicksands  and  against  the  ill  winds  of  some  of  the  shrewdest  and 
most  powerful  elements  in  English  public  life.  The  measure  of 
his  success  at  Nottingham  was  the  passage  of  the  resolutions  already 
agreed  upon  with  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  Trades  Union 
Congress.  These  not  only  sanctioned  the  "war  aims,"  and  banked 
up  united  British  labor  behind  them,  but  wrote  an  enacting  clause 
after  them,  in  the  decision  to  go  ahead  with  the  procedure  of  inter- 
allied and  international  conferences. 

Under  the  caption  "Peace,"  the  resolutions  read: 

That  this  Conference  representing  the  organizations  affiliated  to 
the  Labour  Party — 

(a)  Welcomes  the  statements  as  to  War  Aims  made  by  the 
British  Prime  Minister  and  President  Wilson,  in  so  far  as 
they  are  in  harmony  with  the  War  Aims  of  the  British  La- 
bor Movement,  and  make  for  an  honorable  and  Democratic 
Peace ; 

(&)     Presses  the  Allied  Governments  to  formulate  and  publish 


THE  NOTTINGHAM  MEETING  51 

at  the  earliest  possible  moment  a  joint  statement  of  their 
War  Aims  in  harmony  with  the  above; 

(c)  Approves  the  arrangements  made  for  the  holding  of  a  fur- 
ther conference  in  London  on  the  20th  February  of  the 
Labour  and  Socialist  Parties  of  the  Allied  nations  on  the 
basis  of  the  War  Aims  of  British  Labor  with  the  view  of 
arriving  at  a  general  agreement  among  such  Parties; 

(d)  Calls  upon  the  working  class  organization  of  the  Central 
Powers  to  declare  their  War  Aims  and  to  influence  their 
Governments  to  make  statements  of  their  War  Aims  in 
order  that  the  world  rnay  see  how  far  the  declaration  of 
all  the  Powers  provide  'a  basis  for  a  negotiated  and  lasting 
Peace,  and 

(e)  Assuming  that  a  general  agreement  can  be  arrived  at  by 
the  labor  and  socialist  parties  of  the  Allied  nations  directs 
that  their  several  governments  should  be  then  at  once  urged 
to  allow  facilities  for  attendance  at  an  International  Con- 
gress in  some  neutral  state,  preferably  Switzerland,  at  which 
organized  working  class  opinion  of  all  the  countries  may 
be  represented,  in  order  that  nothing  may  be  left  undone  to 
bring  into  harmony  the  desires  of  the  working  classes  of  all 
the  belligerents. 

That  a  copy  be  forwarded  to  the  Prime  Minister. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  NEW  ISSUE  AND  ITS  ENGINEERS 

Enough  has  been  said  to  bring  out  with  clearness  that  the 
British  labor  offensive  was  not  to  be  mistaken  for  a  propaganda 
movement  rallied  behind  a  few  watch  cries  and  recruited  up  from 
a  handful  of  men  to  a  mass  agitation.  If  we  are  seeking  a  com- 
parison in  current  American  history,  to  what  had  taken  place  in 
the  British  Labour  Party,  it  would  be  to  imagine  that  the  insurgent 
movement  in  the  Republican  Party  had  found  the  national  leaders 
swinging  with  it  in  191 2,  or  had  succeeded  in  shifting  control  from 
such  stand-patters  as  Taft,  Root  and  Cannon  to  Roosevelt,  John- 
son and  the  progressives;  or  to  recall  the  new  and  progressive  tilt 
to  the  balance  of  power  in  the  Democratic  organization  which  came 
that  year  with  the  triumph  of  the  Wilson  Democrats  at  Baltimore. 
There  was  something  tidal  at  work  in  American  political  life.  But 
these  alignments  were  not  at  a  time  of  such  transcendant  national 
crisis,  forcing  men  inexorably  back  to  the  bedrock  of  their  make-up 
for  choices,  nor  were  they  concerned  so  closely  with  the  things 
which  affect  the  individual  in  the  everyday  stuff  of  life  and 
labor. 

The  emergence  of  the  new  leadership  might  be  disposed  of  off- 
hand as  the  recourse  of  a  few  disgruntled  labor  politicians  despoiled 
of  office  and  anxious  not  to  return  to  the  bench.  It  might  be  dis- 
counted as  the  stampeding  of  the  sober  mass  of  labor  by  a  group  of 
hotheads,  the  old  leaders  going  with  the  crowd  lest  their  places  be 
taken  from  them.  These  things  might  have  entered  in,  but  as  ex- 
planations they  were  altogether  too  fine-spun. 

The  upward  thrust  of  the  new  labor  motivation  had  been  a  mat- 
ter of  growth  within  a  great  social  organism,  the  membership  of 
which  had  gone  through  a  searching  common  experience  and  come 
out  feeling  the  same  way.  In  later  chapters  we  shall  press  our 
exploration  back  of  the  sphere  of  war  relations  to  that  of  domestic 
politics,  and  again  back  of  the  sphere  of  domestic  politics  to  that 
of  the  workaday  life — revealing  ever  deeper  reaches  of  experience, 
an  ever  swelling  volume  of  common  feeling.  The  engineers  of  the 
new  offensive  had  been  party  to  this  experience,  had  shared  in  this 
feeling,  and  this  had  come  to  be  as  true  of  the  labor  "center"  as  of 

52 


THE  NEW  ISSUE  AND  ITS  ENGINEERS  53 

the  "left."  It  is  on  the  new  majority  that  we  can  now  fix  attention, 
on  the  men  who  for  two  years  have  guided  developments,  if  we 
would  get  close  to  the  realities. 

The  swing  was  toward  the  left — not  to  it. 

There  has  been  no  end  of  confusion  and  distortion  as  to  the 
personnel  of  the  British  labor  offensive.  It  has  been  associated 
by  some  with  advocacy  of  a  patched  up  peace  that  would  have 
meant  knuckling  in  to  German  militarism.  Now,  the  man  who 
drafted  the  war  aims  memorandum  was  Sidney  Webb,  who  from 
the  beginning  had  been  backing  up  the  war  in  the  New  Statesman. 
Americans  will  remember  a  member  of  the  British  mission  which 
visited  this  country  in  the  early  months  of  the  war.  He  was  called 
by  a  New  York  banker  the  largest  calibered  labor  man  he  had 
ever  met.  This  was  J.  H.  Thomas.  He  was  to  be  found  at  Not- 
tingham, at  the  head  of  the  delegation  of  the  National  Union  of 
Railwaymen.  He  was  chairman  of  one  of  the  chief  committees  at 
the  subsequent  inter-Allied  meeting.  In  each  of  the  great  British 
labor  gatherings  of  the  last  two  years, — as  we  have  seen  at  London 
and  Birmingham,  Blackpool  and  Derby, — he  has  been  in  a  sense 
the  floor  leader  of  that  central  group  which,  with  a  steadfast  fol- 
lowing behind  them,  have  held  the  new  majority  intact  and  con- 
verted the  swing  toward  the  left  into  a  new  dynamic,  cohering 
and  not  disrupting  the  forces  of  labor.  He  has  been  close  to  Hen- 
derson, who  quit  the  government  because,  in  his  words  at  Black- 
pool, he  had  "refused  to  do  what  I  never  will  do,  namely,  desert 
the  people  who  sent  me  into  the  government,"  and  to  Clynes,  who 
coolly  told  the  delegates  at  Nottingham  that  he  would  quit  the 
party  if  they  forced  a  premature  issue  with  the  government,  which, 
in  the  view  of  these  leaders,  might  embarrass  the  nation  in  the 
active  prosecution  of  the  war.  The  war  aims  had  been  put  out  by 
the  new  working  majority  in  which,  as  we  have  seen,  these  three 
and  their  kind  struck  hands  with  such  men  as  Ramsay  MacDonald 
and  Robert  Smillie,  who  had  stood  out  for  working  class  negotia- 
tions from  the  first  year  of  the  war.  The  issue  was  not  pacifism, 
but  imperialism,  and  the  new  working  majority  offered  itself  as 
a  nucleus  around  which  the  democratic  forces  of  England  might 
unite.  Reviewing  Henderson's  new  book,  "The  Aims  of  Labour," 
Sidney  Webb  wrote  in  The  New  Statesman: 

...  It  is  sometimes  foro;otten  how  considerable  was  the  effect 
upon  the  spiritual  course  of  the  war  which  followed  Mr.  Henderson's 
resignation  from  the  Government.  The  people  of  this  country  have 
always  from  the  first  moment  of  the  war  had  only  one  object,  a  peo- 
ple's peace ;  but  there  is  no  doubt  that  as  the  exigencies  of  war  grad- 
ually caused  all  control  of  policy  to  be  surrendered  into  the  hands 


54  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

of  governments,  a  feeling  of  helplessness,  of  inability  to  affect 
policy,  settled  upon  labor  and  the  peoples  in  Western  Europe.  Mr. 
Henderson's  resignation  dissipated  in  this  country  that  feeling  of 
helplessness  and  canalized  once  more  the  desires  and  determination 
of  labor  to  control  policy  and  accept  only  a  people's  peace. 

As  a  check  and  confirmation  both  of  our  impressions  as  visiting 
journalists  and  of  the  ex  parte  statements  of  the  labor  men  them- 
selves, it  will  serve  the  purposes  of  this  interpretation  to  quote  a 
keen  English  observer,  interviewed  just  before  the  Nottingham 
convention.  A  man  of  large  independent  means,  he  could  not  be 
charged  with  class  bias;  a  university  man,  he  was  conscious  of 
those  larger  implications  of  the  English  birthright  that  must  not 
be  sacrificed  for  to-day's  pottage;  an  indefatigable  worker  in  the 
war  service  of  the  nation,  he  was  not  of  the  sort  to  give  aid  or 
comfort  to  the  enemy.  As  he  saw  it,  British  labor  opinion  was 
crystallizing  about  four  or  five  main  propositions: 

1.  For  an  unimperialistic  peace.  Their  demand  that  the  govern- 
ment commit  itself  unreservedly  to  such  a  policy  was  back  of  the  re- 
cent pronouncements  and  pressure  upon  Lloyd  George.  Labor,  he 
believed,  would  back  up  the  war  unreservedly  so  long  as  Germany 
failed  to  meet  the  Allies  on  this  footing. 

2.  For  participation  of  the  people  in  foreign  affairs.  They  felt 
that  the  old  scheme  of  things  in  which  they  had  no  say,  and  the 
general  muddle  of  secret  diplomacy,  had  let  them  in  for  the  present 
war.  This  had  bred  a  determination  that  this  should  not  happen 
again.  They  believed  that  the  government  had  mishandled  the  Rus- 
sian situation ;  they  desired  to  take  a  hand,  to  find  out  about  it,  and 
to   reach  the  working  class  opinion  of  other  countries. 

3.  For  disarmament ;  to  get  the  burden  of  militarism  off  the  backs 
of  the  workers. 

4.  For  democratization  of  industry;  they  wanted  a  direct  say 
over  the  conditions  and  affairs  of  work;  and  more,  to  participate 
themselves  hereafter  in  the  management  of  industry. 

5.  For  a  league  of  nations. 

The  insight  and  precision  of  these  generalizations  our  further 
inquiries  tended  only  to  substantiate;  a  better  telegraphic  sum- 
mary of  the  major  trends  of  the  British  labor  movement  could 
scarcely  be  written  than  the  five  propositions  as  they  lay  in  our 
informant's  mind.  The  particularity  of  his  information  was  shown 
when  we  asked  him  to  specify  why  labor  felt  the  government  had 
mishandled  the  Russian  situation  in  191 7.  He  grouped  points  which 
in  their  reaction  upon  working  class  opinion  both  in  England  and 
in  Russia  were^  he  said,  now  more  and  more  recognized  as  blun- 
ders: 


1 


THE  NEW  ISSUE  AND  ITS  ENGINEERS  55 

Blunder  i.  The  statements  of  Lord  Milner  when  in  Russia,  in  the 
last  days  of  the  old  regime,  supporting  the  Czar's  government  and 
making  the  revolutionists  feel  that  England  w^as  against  them. 

Blunder  2.  The  statement  of  a  member  of  the  ministry  in  Parlia- 
ment after  the  revolution  broke  out,  eulogizing  the  Czar's  govern- 
ment as  an  Ally. 

Blunder  3.  The  refusal  to  let  English  labor  participate  in  the 
Stockholm  conference.  A  statement  was  given  out  which  indicated 
that  the  Kerensky  government  was  opposed  to  the  meeting,  without 
letting  it  be  known  that  this  expression  was  from  the  Russian  Em- 
bassy in  London,  and  not  from  Kerensky.  When  this  reached  Rus- 
sia, it  not  only  had  a  bad  effect  on  Kerensky  but  undermined  his 
position.  Henderson's  resignation  confirmed  the  feeling  among  Eng- 
lish labor  on  this  point. 

Blunder  4.  Acquiescence  by  the  government  in  the  refusal  of 
Havelock  Wilson  and  the  Sailors'  Union  to  transport  Ramsay  Mac- 
Donald  to  Russia.  MacDonald  had  great  influence  in  foreign  labor 
circles.  He  was  whole-heartedly  for  Kerensky,  against  a  separate 
peace,  etc.  He  would  have  unquestionably  fortified  the  provisional 
government. 

Blunder  5.  The  failure  to  carry  out  an  inter-Allied  government 
conference  and  meet  the  Russians  half  way  in  the  matter  of  war 
aims.  The  revolution  had  made  any  earlier  understandings  between 
the  Allies,  to  the  mind  of  the  Russian  people,  a  compact  with  the 
discredited  regime  of  the  Czar.  In  failing  to  carry  through  an  offi- 
cial inter-Allied  conference  restating  the  purposes  of  the  war,  and  in 
failing  to  let  English  labor  participate  in  the  Stockholm  conference, 
Great  Britain  was  acting  in  line  with  positions  taken  by  France  and 
Italy.  Lloyd  George  had  been,  it  was  thought,  favorably  disposed 
toward  such  fresh  action  and  England,  as  labor  saw  it,  should  have 
asserted  her  position. 

Blunder  6.  The  failure  to  allay  the  mistrust  by  labor  of  the  men 
surrounding  Lloyd  George — Milner,  the  man  generally  credited  with 
getting  England  into  the  Boer  War  mess;  Prussian  in  temperament 
and  training;  Carson,  the  aggravating  delayer  of  Irish  settlement; 
hated  throughout  the  north  of  England;  Curzon,  who,  as  viceroy, 
had  set  India  at  heads  and  points; — that  is,  in  labor's  view,  impe- 
rialists who  had  messed  up  British  relations  with  South  Africa,  India 
and  Ireland. 

It  may  well  be  asked  how  far  such  delicate  questions  reached 
down  to  the  average  man  in  the  form  of  gripping  issues:  but  to  see 
that  they  were  bone  and  sinew  of  the  protestantism  of  the  British 
labor  leadership,  one  had  only  to  mark  their  recurrence  in  labor 
press  and  speeches.  Believing  that  such  cabinet  members  were 
the  last  men  to  deal  in  the  spirit  of  English  democracy  either  with 
revolution  abroad  (in  Germany  no  less  than  in  Russia),  or  with 
democratic  strivings  at  home,  the  moderate  central  leaders  were 


$6  THE  BRITISH  LABOR  OFFENSIVE 

confronted  with  the  problem  of  organizing  sentiment  in  such  a 
way  that,  without  weakening  the  war  as  a  defensive  measure  against 
Prussian  autocracy,  they  might  carry  overseas,  as  an  alternative 
projection  of  foreign  policy,  those  democratic  fires  which  were  kin- 
dled in  the  earliest  history  of  English  institutions  and  which  have 
found  new  torch-bearers  with  each  new  age. 

As  a  problem  of  organization,  the  first  objective  was  to  muster 
the  full  strength  of  British  labor  and  those  who  would  bank  up 
behind  it.  Here  the  British  Labour  Party  offered  a  natural  base 
of  operations,  including  in  its  membership  both  socialists  with 
their  kindling  visions  and  trade  unionists  with  their  untapped 
strength;  ready,  also,  to  throw  open  its  doors  to  professional  peo- 
ple, to  cooperators,  to  farmers,  to  women — to  the  common  people 
of  the  nation.  All  but  simultaneously  came  the  awakening  as  we 
have  seen  of  the  older,  larger,  labor  body  in  the  industrial  sphere — 
the  Trades  Union  Congress;  and  at  each  point  the  Labour  Party 
had  been  content  to  go  at  such  pace  as  would  find  the  twain 
shoulder  to  shoulder. 

The  second  objective  was,  on  the  basis  of  this  united  British 
movement  and  its  program,  to  muster  the  full  strength  of  Allied 
labor.  On  the  continent,  in  contrast  to  the  English  situation,  the 
most  prominent  groups  are  socialist,  but  the  re-creation  of  the 
old  Socialist  International  Bureau  was  put  aside  and  a  broadened 
conference  called,  trade  union  and  socialist  alike,  but  designed  to 
build  on  the  dominant  working  class  formations  in  each  nation,  in 
an  effort  to  achieve  that  unity  which  had  escaped  them  in  the  more 
loosely  organized  Inter-Allied  conference  in  London,  in  August, 
191 7,  The  effect  of  this  decision  on  the  make  up  of  the  Inter-Allied 
Labour  and  Socialist  Conference  at  London  in  February,  19 18, 
was  several-fold. 

With  respect  to  British  trade  union  bodies,  it  left  out  the 
General  Federation  of  Trade  Unions  which  originally  grew  out  of  a 
strike  insurance  fund  created  by  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress 
and  now  numbered  some  800,000  members,  as  against  over  four 
milHon  in  the  Congress.  Many  of  its  affiliated  unions  were  mem- 
bers of  the  latter  body,  so  that  its  distinctive  membership  was 
under  100,000.  On  the  other  hand,  the  textile  workers  and  miners, 
for  example,  two  of  the  strongest  national  groups,  did  not  belong 
to  the  General  Federation.  In  191 7,  the  Parliamentary  Committee 
of  the  Trades  Union  Congress  and  the  executive  of  the  British 
Labour  Party  broke  up  a  joint  committee  representing  these  two 
organizations  together  with  the  Federation,  and  reformed  the  com- 
mittee, excluding  the  Federation. 

With  respect  to  minor  British  socialist  bodies,  the  decision  was 


THE  NEW  ISSUE  AND  ITS  ENGINEERS  57 

equally  drastic.  At  pre-war  international  socialist  congresses,  the 
120  British  delegates  had  been  allotted  so  that  the  Labour  Party 
sent  60,  the  Independent  Labour  Party  25,  the  British  Socialist 
Party  25  and  the  Fabian  Society  6.  At  London,  British  representa- 
tion from  the  political  field  was  confined  to  the  Labour  Party,  and 
although  four  members  of  the  smaller,  more  radical  Independer«,t 
Labour  Party  were  included  in  the  Labour  Party  delegation,  they 
refused  to  attend  on  that  basis.  Ramsay  MacDonald,  a  member 
of  the  I.  L.  P.  executive,  participated,  however,  as  treasurer  of 
the  Labour  Party.  Neither  minority  organization,  the  General 
Federation  of  Trade  Unions  on  the  extreme  right  nor  the  I.  L.  P. 
on  the  extreme  left,  was  happy  at  this  turn  of  affairs. 

With  respect  to  outside  delegations,  the  effect  of  the  decision  was 
to  omit  representation  of  neutrals. 

So  much  for  delimitations;  on  the  positive  side  the  effect  of  the 
decision  was  to  throw  open  the  doors  on  equal  footing  in  joint 
session  with  the  socialists,  to  the  distinctly  trade  union  formations, 
such  as  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress,  the  French  Confedera- 
tion Generale  du  Travail  and  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 
With  respect  to  the  United  States,  the  British  leaders  compromised 
their  procedure  by  not  inviting  to  the  London  meeting  the  Amer- 
ican Socialist  Party  as  the  leading  political  labor  body  in  the  United 
States;  doing  so  on  the  understanding  that,  otherwise,  the  Amer- 
ican Federation  of  Labor  would  not  participate;  and  doing  so,  only 
to  have  the  Federation  go  unrepresented  after  all. 

But  the  working  class  movement  of  the  Allied  European  nations, 
socialist  and  labor  alike,  turned  out  in  strength  and  achieved  the 
sought-for  unity. 


i 


PART   II 
THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  INTER-ALLIED   CONFERENCE   AT   LONDON 

On  the  opening  day  of  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist 
Conference  in  London  (February  20,  19 18),  J.  W.  Ogden,  chair- 
man of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  British  Trades  Union 
Congress,  presided.  The  gathering,  he  said,  was  unique  in  the 
history  of  the  labor  movement — the  first  occasion  on  which  the 
workers  had  unitedly  evinced  a  determination  to  take  a  dominating 
part  in  the  issues  of  war  and  peace;  and  for  justification: 

Our  initial  declaration  that,  whatever  may  have  been  the  causes 
of  the  outbreak  of  the  war,  it  is  clear  that  the  peoples  of  Europe 
who  are  necessarily  the  chief  sufferers  from  its  horrors  had  them- 
selves no  hand  in  it,  is  a  truth  so  insistent  and  indisputable  that  we 
are  justified  in  putting  the  strongest  possible  emphasis  on  the  state- 
ment. 

The  London  Times  in  its  news  report  put  the  case  from  another 
and  less  sympathetic  angle: 

Whatever  else  may  be  uncertain,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  those 
who  have  called  to-day's  meeting  are  determined  to  strain  every 
nerve  in  the  effort  to  secure  a  settlement  of  the  war  by  the  inter- 
vention of  what  are,  after  all,  only  sections  of  the  nations. 

This  London  conference  of  February,  19 18,  according  to  the 
official  statement  issued  at  its  closing  session,  consisted  of  the 
following  delegations: 

The  members  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  Trades 
Union  Congress  and  of  the  National  Executive  of  the  Labour  Party; 
representatives  of  the  Italian  Socialist  Union  and  the  Italian  Official 
Socialists ;  representatives  of  the  Confederation  General  du  Travail 
and  of  the  French  Socialist  Party;  and  representatives  of  the  Bel- 
gian Labour  Party.  There  were  also  present  consultative  delegates 
from   South  Africa,   Rumania,   and   the   South    Slav   organizations. 

Messages  were  read  from  organizations  in  New  Zealand,  Portu- 
gal, South  Africa,  Rumania  and  from  the  Social  Revolutionary  Party 
in  Russia,  endorsing  the  British  labor  memorandum  on  war  aims. 

Camille  Huysmans  (secretary  of  the  International  Socialist  Bu- 
reau) read  a  telegram  sent  to  the  French  Socialist  Party  by  Rous- 

61 


62  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

sanoff,  Soukhomline,  and  Erlich,  on  behalf  of  the  Menshevik  section 
of  the  Russian  Social  Democratic  Party  and  the  Russian  Social 
Revolutionary  Party,  intimating  that  these  sections  of  the  Russian 
Socialist  movement  had  appointed  delegates  to  attend  the  Inter-Allied 
Conference.  The  Bolshevist  government,  however,  had  refused 
passports  to  the  delegations,  and  the  message  recorded  their  emphatic 
protest  against  this  measure. 

Incidentally,  the  concluding  sentence  supplied  an  interesting 
footnote  to  the  attempt,  currently  made  in  the  United  States,  to 
identify  the  proceedings  at  London  with  the  Bolsheviki  and  the 
Brest-Litovsk  negotiations.  There  were  present  at  London,  how- 
ever, representatives  of  the  Italian  Official  Socialists,  whose  national 
officers,  Lazzari  and  Bombacci,  were  in  March,  191 8,  sentenced  to 
prison  for  issuing  circulars  in  November,  December  and  January. 
In  these  they  had  urged,  according  to  the  Rome  dispatches,  "every 
possible  opposition  to  war,"  and  upheld  "their  Russian  comrades." 
Their  defence  was  that  they  considered  themselves  bound  by  the 
International  Socialist  Congress  at  Basel  in  191 2,  and  "that  it  was 
their  duty  to  remain  apart  from  the  war  and  do  everything  they 
could  to  secure  peace."  At  London,  also,  the  French  minority 
socialists  had  equal  representation  with  the  French  majority 
(numerically  the  names  had  become  a  misfit)  in  the  united  French 
delegation;  but  the  Kienthalians  (the  extreme  left)  were  not  repre- 
sented. 

But  to  set  up  the  inference  that  the  London  conference  was 
only  a  new  front  for  the  extremists  is  as  beside  the  mark  as  were 
the  efforts  to  characterize  the  suffrage  movement  in  its  earlier  stages 
by  the  positions  taken  on  marriage  by  some  of  the  more  pronounced 
feminists;  or  to  identify  the  Lincoln  Republicans  with  the  aboli- 
tionists in  the  campaign  of  eighteen-sixty.  The  engineers  of  the 
British  labor  offensive  set  the  gauge  of  their  movement  broad  enough 
to  draw  into  their  affirmative  program  and  procedure,  elements 
which  until  then  had  been  largely  negative  in  their  attitude  towards 
the  war,  together  with  the  larger  groups  which  had  been  consistently 
for  the  war.  To  do  less  than  that  would  have  been  to  defeat  the 
very  purpose  of  the  movement,  namely,  to  afford  a  constructive 
sluice-way  for  all  the  springs  of  working-class  unrest  and  aspiration 
among  the  western  democracies  and  turn  them  into  a  constructive 
force.  It  was  this  affirmative  program  and  procedure  which,  as 
such,  united  them  and  became  the  object  of  their  support. 

That  labor  should  seek  unity  in  things  essential,  in  things  not 
essential,  liberty;  is  one  of  the  most  characteristic  of  Henderson's 
phrases.  It  was  the  spirit  of  the  confererxe  leadership — letting  the 
defeatists,  on  the  one  extreme,  and  the  chauvinists,  on  the  other, 


THE  INTER-ALLIED  CONFERENCE  AT  LONDON    63 

go  their  ways  apart,  while  proceeding  deliberately  with  the  major- 
ity program,  backed  up  by  the  center  and  the  strong  intermediate 
elements  toward  right  and  left.  The  London  correspondent  of  the 
Manchester  Guardian,  commenting  on  the  success  of  the  February 
conference  to  get  together,  where  that  of  August  had  failed,  pointed 
out  that  platform  and  procedure  were  the  result  of  a  "distinct  will 
for  unity."  Early  in  the  meeting,  Canepa  for  the  Italian  reformist 
group  reported  that  they  were  ready  to  agree  with  the  British 
memorandum  with  very  slight  amendments  and  that  the)'  had  had 
conferences  with  the  Jugo-Slavs  as  a  result  of  which  a  considerable 
measure  of  agreement  had  been  disclosed — a  statement  foreshad- 
owing the  later  official  approachment  between  the  Italian  govern- 
ment and  the  Jugo-Slavs.  Albert  Thomas,  who  as  minister  of 
munitions  earlier  in  the  war  is  credited  with  having  done  for 
France  what  Lloyd  George  did  for  England  in  speeding  up  the  pro- 
duction of  war  material,  toured  England  following  the  London  con- 
ference, speaking  on  platforms  with  members  of  the  cabinet  and 
others  in  behalf  of  Anglo-French  understanding  and  unity.  He 
stood  for  the  same  thing  in  the  conference  of  the  workers.  At  the 
opening  session  he  reported  that  never  had  there  been  such  a 
"healthy  and  unanimous  collaboration  between  the  Socialist  Party 
and  the  Federation  of  Labor  in  France  as  now."  "The  French 
Socialist  Party  in  their  National  Council  had  registered  agreement 
in  such  a  majority  that  it  might  be  described  as  practically  unani- 
mous." And  at  the  closing  luncheon,  the  London  Times  quoted 
him  as  saying  that 

the  conference  had  done  what  the  governments  and  the  old  tradi- 
tional diplomacy  had  refused  to  do.  It  had  never  hesitated  to  face 
difficulties  and  differences,  even  on  delicate  questions.  It  had  been 
able  to  deal  with  the  question  of  the  colonies,  although  that  vitally 
affected  certain  British  interests.  The  delegates  had  also  been  able 
to  discuss  frankly  and  fully  the  war  aims  of  Italy.  They  had  not 
hesitated,  as  governments  had  done,  to  support  the  claims  of  op- 
pressed nationalities,  and  they  had  given  a  definite  reply  to  the 
appeal  of  the  southern  Slavs.  The  governments  were  concerning 
themselves  with  propaganda  in  Germany.  Lord  Northcliffe  had  been 
placed  in  charge  of  this  work  here.  If  he  was  to  be  well  advised 
he  would  not  rely  exclusively  on  the  help  of  business  men,  scientists, 
or  newspaper  men,  but  would  turn  to  the  representatives  of  the  work- 
ing classes.  Then  he  would  receive  sound  advice  on  the  best  method 
of  speaking  to  the  German  people. 

In  a  sense,  the  most  notable  advance  of  the  conference  in  achiev- 
ing a  common  procedure  was  the  action  of  the  Belgians.  According 
to  the  official  report  Vandervelde  stated: 


64  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

During  the  discussions  at  the  international  commission  he  had 
received  a  letter  from  the  Belgian  Labor  Party  in  which  it  was 
stated  that  they  had  reconsidered  the  matter  and  consulted  with  re- 
sponsible leading  members  of  the  Belgian  labor  movement,  and  that 
instead  of  the  unanimity  that  previously  existed,  there  was  a  ma- 
jority and  a  minority.  The  minority  was  completely  in  favor  of 
giving  freedom  of  action  to  their  three  oilficial  representatives.  The 
majority  said  that  until  the  German  socialists  definitely  declared  that 
they  vvere  ready  to  bring  pressure  on  their  government  to  agree  to 
conditions  of  a  democratic  peace  they  thought  that  an  interna- 
tional conference  would  be  practically  impossible  and  morally  jfutile. 
That  opinion  coincided  with  the  views  of  the  three  Belgian  dele- 
gates. 

But  at  the  present  time  they  might  reasonably  discuss  the  question 
whether  the  German  socialists  could  be  brought  into  harmony  with 
them  on  the  lines  of  a  democratic  peace.  That  question  had  been 
partly  answered  by  a  section  of  the  German  socialist  movement — the 
Independent  Socialist  Party.  But  when  the  views  of  the  major- 
ity of  the  German  socialists  were  known,  the  Belgian  socialists 
would  be  able  to  judge  of  the  opportuneness  of  a  general  confer- 
ence. 

From  the  beginning  of  the  war  he  had  admitted  that  the  German 
socialists  were  in  a  difficult  position,  and  they  had  to  make  certain 
allowances  for  them.  Although  the  grounds  of  their  grievances 
against  them  were  serious,  he  recognized  that,  placed  between  Czar- 
ism  and  the  western  democracies,  their  situation  was  perplexing. 
The  German  socialists  believed  then  that  the  danger  was  Czarist 
Russia.  They  could  not  make  that  plea  now.  Germany  was  sur- 
rounded by  none  but  democracies,  free  peoples  who  were  fighting  to 
resist  imperialism,  to  maintain  freedom,  and  the  spirit  and  forms  of 
democratic  government. 

To-day,  since  the  Russian  revolution,  the  choice  for  the  Germans 
lay  between  a  democratic  peace  that  would  not  threaten  them  and  a 
peace  dictated  by  their  general  staff,  which  would  threaten  them  and 
the  rest  of  the  world  with  an  unbearable  servitude.  They  had  before 
them  a  unique  opportunity  to  confess  their  socialist  faith,  atone  for 
their  past  failures,  and  secure,  with  freedom  for  other  countries, 
their  own  freedom  from  militaristic  and  imperialistic  oppression. 

At  the  outset  of  the  London  conference,  five  commissions  were 
created,  and  it  is  significant  that  in  every  case  the  chairmanships 
of  these  important  working  committees  went  to  the  conservatives. 
Renaudel,  the  French  majority  socialist  who  had  recently  been 
exposing  German  spy  activities  in  the  industrial  districts  of  France, 
was  named  as  head  of  the  commission  to  report  on  the  League  of 
Nations;  Sidney  Webb  as  head  of  the  territorial  commission;  J.  H. 
Thomas  as  head  of  the  economic  commission;  Albert  Thomas  as 
head  of  the  committee  on  publicity  and  drafting;  and  Henderson  as 


THE  INTER-ALLIED  CONFERENCE  AT  LONDON     65 

head  of  the  committee  on  the  advisability  and  conditions  of  an 
international  conference.^ 

As  in  all  democratic  movements,  it  was  possible  that  at  some 
future  stage  the  center  of  gravity  might  swing  still  further  to  the 
left  on  the  war  issue.  But  the  course  of  military  events  on  both 
fronts,  in  which  the  ruthless  power  and  intention  of  the  German 
imperialists  showed  itself  in  such  stark  contrast  to  the  ability  of 
the  German  socialists  to  counter  it,  had  no  other  result,  in  the 
succeeding  months,  than  to  stiffen  the  conviction  of  the  conference 
leadership  in  standing  out  for  the  unremitting  prosecution  of  the 
war  as  the  resistance  of  the  democracies  to  the  transcendant  threat 
of  Prussian  militarism.  At  the  same  time  they  awaited  those 
crystallizations  in  working-class  purpose  in  Germany  which,  as 
events  have  proved,  they  firmly  believed  their  joint  unimperialistic 
overtures — like  the  manganese  that  is  thrown  from  the  outside  into 
the  molten  mass  of  the  converter  in  a  steel  mill — might  yet  help  to 
bring  into  being. 

The  London  conference  made  the  convincing  manifestation  of 
that  change  on  the  part  of  the  German  labor  and  socialist  groups 
a  prerecjuisite  to  any  inter-belligerent  meeting — the  next  objective 
in  the  British  procedure  to  achieve  unity.  The  controlling  para- 
graphs in  the  war  aims  memorandum  adopted  at  London  read: 

As  an  essential  condition  to  an  international  conference,  the  com- 
mission is  of  the  opinion  that  the  organizers  of  the  conference  should 
satisf}'  themselves  that  all  the  organizations  to  be  represented  put 
in  precise  form,  by  a  public  declaration,  their  peace  terms  in  con- 
formity with  the  principles  "no  annexations  or  punitive  indemnities, 
and  the  right  of  all  peoples  to  self-determination,"  and  that  they  are 
working  with  all  their  power  to  obtain  from  their  governments  the 
necessary  guarantees  to  apply  those  principles  honestly  and  unre- 
servedly to  all  questions  to  be  dealt  with  at  any  official  peace  con- 
ference. 

^  The  officers  of  the  five  commissions  were : 

League  of  Nations. — iM.  Renaudel  (French  Majority  Socialist),  Chm. ; 
Ramsay  MacDonald   (British  Labour  Party),  Sec'y. 

Territorial  Commission. — Sidney  Webb  (British  Labour  Party),  Chm.; 
Jean  Longuet  (French  Minority  Socialist),  Sec'y. 

Economic  Commission. — J.  H.  Thomas,  M.  P.,  Chm. 

Publicity  and  Drafting  Commission. — Albert  Thomas  (French  Major- 
ity Socialist),  Chm.;  G.  H.  Stuart  Bunning  (British  Trades  Union 
Congress),   Sec'y- 

Advisability  and  Conditions  of  International  Conference. — Arthur 
Henderson  (British  Labour  Party),  Chm.;  M.  de  Brouckere  (Bel- 
gian Socialist),  Sec'y. 

Albert  Thomas  later,  at  his  request,  was  transferred  to  the  territorial 
commission. 


66  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

In  view  of  the  vital  differences  between  the  Allied  countries  and 
the  Central  Powers,  the  commission  is  of  opinion  that  it  is  highly- 
desirable  that  the  conference  should  be  used  to  provide  an  oppor- 
tunity for  the  delegates  from  the  respective  countries  now  in  a  state 
of  war  to  make  a  full  and  frank  statement  of  their  present  position 
and  future  intentions  and  to  endeavor  by  mutual  agreement  to  ar- 
range a  program  of  action  for  a  speedy  and  democratic  peace.  .  .  . 

The  Belgian  delegation,  which  for  the  first  time  came  into 
an  Inter-Allied  conference  without  a  mandate  to  oppose  an  inter- 
national gathering,  carried  conviction  as  to  this  conservative  pro- 
cedure. Moreover,  the  London  conference  did  not  attempt  to  rees- 
tablish the  International  Socialist  Bureau  with  its  old  scheme  of 
representation,  but  decided  that  any  international  conference, 

held  during  the  period  of  hostilities,  should  be  organized  by  a  com- 
mittee whose  impartiality  cannot  be  questioned.  It  should  be  held 
in  a  neutral  country,  under  such  conditions  as  would  inspire  confi- 
dence; and  the  conference  should  be  fully  representative  of  all  the 
labor  and  socialist  movements  in  all  the  belligerent  countries  accept- 
ing the  conditions  under  which  the  conference  is  convoked. 

The  fact  that  the  Italian  reformists  and  the  French  majority 
groups — the  pro-war  wings  of  the  socialist  parties  in  the  Latin 
countries  which  had  shared  in  the  war  ministries  no  less  than  the 
Belgian  socialists — were  for  this  procedure  is  evidence  that  they 
had  confidence  in  the  safeguards  outlined.  We  must  weigh  that 
against  snap  judgments  on  this  side  of  the  water  that  the  Germans 
would  have  dominated  "every  feature  of  the  program." 

This  London  meeting  was  in  early  February.  In  the  suc- 
ceeding months  the  burden  upon  General  Foch  as  supreme  com- 
mander of  Allied  and  American  forces  in  France  was  to  engineer 
such  swift,  united  resistance  to  the  tremendous  German  drive  as 
to  leave  it  a  crumpled  and  disastrous  failure.  Beneath  his  imme- 
diate commission  observers  were  quick  to  see  in  this  move,  prompted 
by  the  crisis,  a  further  step  toward  organizing  that  mutual  force 
to  check  and  thwart  aggression  which  had  been  advocated  as  the 
essential  arm  of  a  league  of  nations. 

The  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference  was  a  mani- 
festation of  another  essential  factor — a  first  international  joining 
of  hands  of  great  social  groups  that  found  common  cause  in  the 
principles  which  they  held  should  enter  into  the  constitution  and 
legislation  of  such  a  league. 


CHAPTER  IX 

ALLIED  labor's  WAR  AIMS 

A  POINT  has  been  reached  where  we  can  turn  from  the  steps 
taken  in  engineering  the  program  upon  which  British  labor  had 
united  as  never  before  the  whole  working  class  movement  among 
the  Allies,  and  resolve  it  into  its  elements.  As  Vandervelde  said, 
the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference  [London,  Feb- 
ruary 20-24,  19 1 8]  was  charged  with  working  out  a  platform  and 
a  procedure. 

The  basis  of  that  platform  was  the  war  aims  memorandum  ^ 
adopted  in  December  by  the  British  labor  movement,  but  the 
Inter-Allied  document "  transcended  all  earlier  outgivings  in  its  ap- 
proach to  the  problems  of  international  relations,  in  the  sequence 
with  which  it  marshaled  the  principles  of  the  workers'  statecraft 
and  in  their  application  in  turn,  to  the  war,  to  the  political  ordering 
of  the  world,  to  territorial  questions,  to  economic  relations  and  to 
the  problems  of  peace,  of  restoration  and  reparation. 

"A  device  of  the  capitalist  interests,"  read  the  Inter-Allied  labor 
memorandum,  would  be  "to  pretend  that  the  treaty  of  peace  need 
concern  itself  only  with  the  cessation  of  the  struggle  of  the  armed 
forces  and  with  any  necessary  territorial  adjustments."  It  reiter- 
ated that  "a.  victory  for  German  imperialism  would  be  the  defeat 
and  destruction  of  democracy  and  liberty  in  Europe,"  but  it  en- 
visaged only  less  as  a  defeat  any  return  to  the  status  quo  ante 
in  terms  of  a  return  to  competing  imperialisms, — to  a  crushing  load 
of  competitive  armaments  on  the  backs  of  the  workers, — to  a  world 
order  of  subject  races  and  subjugated  masses, — to  the  "war  system" 
as  the  world  knew  it  prior  to  19 14,  with  its  "old  yearnings  after 
domination"  which  "corrupted  the  aspirations  of  nationalities  and 
brought  Europe  to  a  condition  of  anarchy  and  disorder,  which  have 
led  men  to-day  to  the  present  catastrophe."  "Of  all  the  conditions 
of  peace,"  it  said,  "none  is  so  important  to  the  peoples  of  the  world 
as  that  there  should  be  henceforth  on  earth  no  more  war."  It  held 
up  the  vision  of  a  new  world  which,  to  the  workers,  made  the 


*  Appendix  L 
^Appendix  IL 


67 


68  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

struggle  worth  its  cost.  It  brought  down  to  earth  and  the  common 
people  thereof  each  of  the  great  principles  of  settlement. 

Thus,  the  Inter-Allied  labor  memorandum  grounded  its  general 
proposals  for  a  league  of  nations  on  the  principle  of  self-government, 
as  expressed  in  the  demand  for  self-determination.  It  was  for 
making  the  league  inclusive  of  all  belligerents  and  of  every  inde- 
pendent state,  but  it  was  for  making  the  "complete  democratiza- 
tion" of  any  nation  the  qualification  for  its  participation  therein. 
By  the  same  principle,  the  emphasis  put  by  the  diplomats  upon 
international  courts  was  thrown  by  the  workers  (without  abandon- 
ing the  tribunals)  upon  an  international  parliament.  By  so  much, 
they  held,  would  the  common  people  of  the  world  become  sover- 
eign, and  look  to  their  security  in  their  own  kind,  as  against  the 
"arbitrary  powers  who,  until  now,  have  assumed  the  right  of 
choosing  between  peace  and  war." 

Labor's  memorandum  called  for  the  use  by  the  nations  of  "any 
and  every  means  at  their  disposal,  either  economic  or  military,"  in 
making  common  cause  against  any  state  refusing  to  submit  to  an 
arbitration  award  or  .attempting  to  break  the  covenant  of  peace.  But 
it  called  also  for  "the  prohibition  of  great  armaments  on  land  and 
sea,  and  for  the  common  limitation  of  the  existing  armaments  by 
which  all  the  people  are  burdened,"  and  it  did  so  in  order  to  pre- 
pare "for  the  concerted  abolition  of  compulsory  military  service 
in  all  countries."  Thus  it  put  in  terms  of  war  and  its  heavy  levies 
upon  the  working  years  and  the  workers'  lives,  the  old  American 
rallying  cry  that  "taxation  without  representation  is  tyranny." 

It  was  under  the  control  of  a  League  of  Nations,  so  condi- 
tioned, that  the  workers  were  for  putting  "the  consultation  of 
peoples  for  purposes  of  self-determination";  it  was  by  the  estab- 
lishment of  such  a  system  of  laws  and  guarantees  that  they  saw 
removed  "the  last  excuse  for  those  strategic  protections  which 
nations  hitherto  have  felt  bound  to  require."  They  expressed 
agreement  with  the  four  propositions  put  forward  by  President  Wil- 
son in  his  message  of  February  ii,  191 8,  and  as  against  forcible 
annexation  or  conquest,  they  grounded  their  territorial  proposi- 
tions on  the  right  of  each  people  to  determine  their  lives.  "Neither 
destiny  of  race  nor  identity  of  language,"  so  often  a  "cloak  for 
aggression,"  but  the  "desire  of  the  people  concerned"  was  their 
touchstone.    The  memorandum  called  specifically — 

For  the  reparation  by  the  German  government  of  the  wrong  ad- 
mittedly done  Belgium ;  full  payment  for  damage  done  and  the  resto- 
ration of  Belgium  as  an  independent  sovereign  state. 

For  the  disannexation  of  Alsace-Lorraine  as  a  matter  of  right  and 
as  precedent  to  a  plebiscite,  devised  by  th^  League  of  Nations,  such 


ALLIED  LABOR'S  WAR  AIMS  69 

as  should  "settle  forever'^  the  future  of  the  provinces,  and  finally 
remove  from  all  Europe  a  quarrel  which  has  imposed  so  heavy  a 
burden  upon  it. 

For  the  evacuation  of  Serbia,  Montenegjro,  Rumania,  Albania  and 
all  the  Balkan  territories  occupied  by  force ;  redress  and  reparation 
for  all  violations ;  each  people  to  be  given  full  liberty  to  settle  its 
own  destin}^;  and  the  Balkan  states  encouraged  to  federate  for  the 
settlement  of  common  problems  of  customs  and  ports,  autonomy,  and 
the  liberties  of  minorities. 

For  the  support  of  the  claims  of  Italians,  hitherto  left  outside 
Italian  boundaries  for  strategic  reasons,  to  be  united  with  Italy,  and 
for  full  liberty  of 'local  self-government  for  such  Slavs  as  remain  in 
Italian  territory,  such  Italians  as  remain  on  the  East  shores  of  the 
Adriatic. 

For  the  reconstitution  of  Poland  in  unity  and  independence  with 
free  access  to  the  sea. 

For  the  abandonment  by  Germany  of  any  scheme  of  annexation, 
open  or  disguised,  of  Livonia,  Courland  and  Lithuania. 

For  according,  under  the  rules  of  the  League  of  Nations,  national 
independence  to  such  of  the  peoples  of  Austro-Hungary  as  demand 
it  and  their  freedom  to  substitute  a  federation  of  Danubian  states 
for  the  Empire.  [The  conference  did  "not  propose  as  a  war  aim," 
its  dismemberment  or  its  deprivation  of  economic  access  to  the  sea, 
but  could  not  admit  that  the  claims  of  the  Czecho-Slovaks  and  Jugo- 
slavs "must  be  regarded  merely  as  questions  for  internal  decision."] 

For  the  freedom  of  Palestine  from  "oppressive  government  by 
the  Turk"  and  the  formation  of  a  free  state  under  international  guar- 
antee to  which  the  Jewish  people  may  return  to  work  out  their  own 
salvation  free  from  interference. 

For  the  freeing  of  Armenia,  Mesopotamia  and  Arabia  from  the 
"tyranny  of  the  Sultan  and  his  pashas,"  and,  if  their  peoples  are 
not  able  to  settle  their  own  destinies,  for  their  administration  under 
an  international  commission  subject  to  the  League  of  Nations. 

For  the  permanent  neutralization  of  the  Dardanelles. 

For  the  special  consideration  at  the  Peace  Conference  of  the 
question  of  colonies  taken  by  conquest ;  for  "economic  equality  in 
such  territories  for  the  people  of  all  nations,"  for  the  "concession  of 
administrative  autonomy  for  all  groups  of  people  that  attain  a  cer- 
tain degree  of  civilization,  and  for  all  others  a  progressive  partici- 
pation in  local  government,"  and  for  tropical  Africa  a  "system  of 
control  established  by  agreement  under  the  League  of  Nations," 
which  would  "take  into  account  the  wishes  of  the  peoples,"  would 
safeguard  the  native  tribes  in  the  ov/nership  of  the  soil,  and  "devote 
all  revenues  to  the  well-being  and  development  of  the  colonies  them- 
selves." 

In  other  ways,  the  memorandum  grounded  its  economic  propo- 
sitions on  the  principle  of  stripping  international  relations  of  priv- 
ilege, economic  friction  and  oppression.     It  ranged  labor 


70  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

Against  punitive  indemnities. 

Against  the  economic  boycott  of  any  country. 

Against  the  capitalistic  exploitation  or  militarization  of  the 
natives  of  any  colony  or  dependency. 

Against  the  "alliance  between  the  military  imperialists  and  fiscal 
protectionists  in  any  country  whatsoever"  as  "a  serious  danger  to  the 
prosperity  of  the  masses  of  the  people"  and  "a  grave  menace  to 
peace." 

Constructively,  labor  expressed  itself: 

For  the  freedom  of  "the  main  lines  of  marine  connection"  with- 
out hindrance  to  vessels  of  all  nations  under  the  League. 

For  the  "open  door  without  hostile  discrimination  against  for- 
eign countries." 

For  the  conservation  by  each  nation,  of  "its  own  supply  of  food- 
stuffs and  raw  materials,  for  its  own  people"  along  with  the  "de- 
velopment of  its  resources  for  the  benefit  of  the  world." 

For  (in  view  of  the  world-wide  shortages  caused  by  the  war)  a 
systematic  arrangement,  on  an  international  basis,  for  the  allocation 
and  conveyance  of  the  available  exportable  surpluses  "to  the  differ- 
ent countries,  in  proportion  not  to  their  purchasing  powers,  but  to 
their  several  pressing  needs,"  coupled  with  government  control, 
within  each  country,  in  order  to  "secure  their  appropriation  not  in 
a  competitive  market  mainly  to  the  richer  classes  in  proportion  to 
their  means  but  systematically  to  meet  the  most  urgent  needs  of  the 
whole  community." 

For  (in  view  of  the  discharge  of  millions  of  munition  workers 
and  the  demobilization  of  millions  of  soldiers)  government  projects 
to  prevent  the  flinging  of  "a  large  part  of  the  wage-earning  popula- 
tion into  all  the  miseries  of  unemployment,"  "as  much  the  result  of 
government  neglect  as  is  any  epidemic  disease." 

For  international  agreement  "for  the  enforcement  in  all  countries 
of  the  legislation  on  factory  conditions,  a  maximum  eight-hour  day, 
the  prevention  of  'sweating'  and  unhealthy  trades,  necessary  to  pro- 
tect the  workers  against  exploitation  and  oppression,  and  the  pro- 
hibition of  night  work  by  women  and  children." 

For  the  restoration  of  devastated  areas,  as  "one  of  the  most  im- 
perative duties  of  all  countries  immediately  peace  is  declared,"  for 
the  "assessment  and  distribution  of  the  compensation  so  far  as  con- 
tributed by  any  international  fund  under  the  direction  of  an  inter- 
national commission,"  and  for  a  restoration  not  limited  "to  compen- 
sation for  public  buildings,  capitalist  undertakings  and  material  prop- 
erty proved  to  be  destroyed  or  damaged,"  but  "extended  to  setting 
up  the  wage  earners  and  peasants  themselves  in  homes  and  em- 
ployment." 

For  the  setting  up  of  a  court  of  claims  and  accusations  which 
should  investigate  allegations  of  "cruelty,  oppression,  violence  and 
theft  against  individual  victims,   for  which  no  justification  can  be 


ALLIED  LABOR'S  WAR  AIMS  71 

found  in  the  ordinary  usages  of  war";  and  should  summon  persons 
and  governments  before  it  and  award  damages.  Particular  atten- 
tion was  drawn  to  the  loss  of  life  and  property  of  merchant  seamen 
and  other  non-combatants,  including  women  and  children,  resulting 
from  this  inhuman  conduct. 

Thus,  at  every  point,  labor  was  for  giving  human  content  to 
the  "safety"  of  democracy  after  the  war.  It  was  not  a  dynastic 
map,  nor  a  destiny  map,  nor  a  trade  map,  but  a  peoples'  map  that 
it  proposed  should  be  engrossed  at  the  Peace  Conference. 

Repeatedly,  in  the  course  of  the  war — whether  before  Amer- 
ica's entrance,  at  the  time  of  the  President's  first  request  to  the 
Allies  for  a  statement  of  war  aims,  or  in  19 18  in  the  exchanges  as 
to  Japanese  intervention  in  Siberia — Americans  who  have  access 
to  the  British  press  have  caught  the  note  of  comprehension  and 
democratic  sympathy  with  the  American  viewpoint  in  such  journals 
as  the  Manchester  Guardian.  Here  is  what  the  Manchester  Guard- 
ian said  of  the  war  aims  of  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist 
Conference  of  February,  191 8: 

.  .  .  Above  all  and  through  all  runs  the  demand,  not  as  a  sequel 
in  the  conclusion  of  peace,  but  as  an  essential  part  of  the  terms  of 
peace,  for  the  establishment  of  an  effective  League  of  Nations,  for 
disarmament,  for  the  substitution  of  international  law  for  force,  and, 
as  a  corollary  of  these  things,  for  open  diplomacy,  the  publication  of 
all  treaties,  the  effective  control  of  foreign  affairs  by  popularly 
elected  bodies.  It  follows,  of  course,  that  if  governments  are  to  rest 
upon  consent  and  foreign  affairs  are  to  be  controlled  by  popularly 
elected  bodies,  there  will  be  no  room  left  for  the  autocracies,  and  that 
conclusion  is  plainly  drawn.  It  is  indeed  designed  that  the  whole  of 
the  belligerent  nations  shall  form  part  of  the  League  of  Nations,  and 
no  conditions  of  entry  are  in  terms  imposed.  But  no  nation  could 
enter  a  league  with  such  functions  and  such  a  constitution  which  had 
not  pretty  effectively  democratized  itself — more  effectively  indeed,  as 
regards  control  of  foreign  affairs,  than  has  our  own  country  up  to 
the  present  moment.  The  first  object  of  such  a  league  is  declared 
to  be  the  one  laid  down  by  President  Wilson  for  his  own  people,  "to 
make  the  world  safe  for  democracy,"  and  it  is  to  a  democratic 
world,  and  a  democratic  world  only,  that  the  conference  looks  for 
the  mighty  step  forward  in  the  adjustment  of  human  affairs  which 
is  necessary  as  the  sequel  to  this  war  if  worse,  and  much  worse,  is 
not  to  befall  us  in  the  days  to  come. 

This  is  the  answer  of  democracy  to  autocracy,  to-day  so  seem- 
ingly triumphant,  and  it  is  surely  a  notable  one.  It  is,  be  it  ob- 
served, the  answer  not  of  British  democracy  alone,  but  of  the  labor 
forces  of  the  Allied  nations.  The  governments  have  so  far  failed 
to  draw  up  a  common  programme  of  war  aims;  the  conference  has 
done  it  for  them.    All  the  world  can  now  know  the  policy  of  Allied 


72  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

labor,  and  labor  among  the  central  powers  may  usefully  ponder  it. 
What  will  it  say?  That  we  have  yet  to  learn,  and  nothing  must 
stand  in  the  way  of  our  learning  it.  For  in  truth  it  is  on  the  accord 
of  the  democracies  far  more  than  on  that  of  their  governments  for 
the  time  being  that  the  future  depends.  Indeed,  it  may  yet  be  that 
only  through  the  effective  accord  of  the  peoples  can  peace  be  reached 
at  all.  It  is  for  the  peoples,  therefore,  to  assert  themselves,  our  own 
people,  the  French  and  Italian  peoples,  the  German  and  Austrian 
peoples.  What  hope,  will  it  be  said,  is  there  of  that?  How  is  a 
triumphant  militarism,  at  this  very  moment  rich  with  spoil,  to  be 
crushed  and  broken?  Perhaps  the  triumph  is  pretty  far  from  being 
as  complete  as  it  seems ;  perhaps  even  its  leaders  have  something 
more  than  a  suspicion  that  their  power  rests  on  no  very  stable  base, 
and  that  unless  they  in  their  turn  can  offer  their  people  something 
more  than  conquest,  can  at  least  assure  them  peace,  there  may  be 
limits  to  the  endurance  of  the  most  patient.  But  in  order  that  the 
peoples  in  those  countries  may  have  some  stable  ground  to  go  upon, 
in  order  that  they  may  know  what  for  them  peace  would  mean,  it  is 
essential  that  the  terms  should  be  clearly  stated,  and  stated  col- 
lectively. That  is  what  the  inter-Allied  conference  has  done  so  far 
as  labor  is  concerned.  It  is  well  done,  and  the  Allied  government? 
would  be  well  advised  speedily  to  follow  suit.  When  it  is  fully 
known  to  the  German  people  that  peace  means  not  subjection  but  lib^ 
erty,  there  is  no  saying  what  useful  transformations  may  not  follow. 

Now  it  may  be  said  that  the  Manchester  Guardian  is  a  liberal 
paper,  which  held  a  critical  attitude  towards  not  a  few  of  the 
activities  of  the  British  War  Cabinet.  Let  us  turn,  therefore,  to 
the  editorial  page  of  the  London  Times,  the  chief  of  the  North- 
cliffe  press.  On  February  25,  the  Times  published  the  war-aims 
memorandum  of  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference 
in  full,  and  described  the  memorandum  as  in  the  main  "sound  and 
sensible."  Under  the  heading,  A  Democratic  Challenge,  the  Times 
said  in  its  leading  editorial: 

The  organizers  of  the  Allied  Labour-Socialist  Conference  of  last 
week  have  every  right  to  congratulate  themselves  on  the  result. 
In  the  first  place  they  secured  agreement,  which  is  in  itself  no  small 
triumph ;  and,  in  the  second  place,  they  did  so,  not  by  watering  down 
the  British  labor  memorandum  to  a  few  colorless  generalities,  but 
rather  by  amplifying  and  strengthening  it.  The  result  is  a  very 
long,  detailed  and  definite  statement  of  war  aims  and  peace  terms. 
The  vi^eakest  part  is  the  preamble,  taken  from  a  resolution  adopted  at 
a  socialist  conference  held  three  years  ago,  and  implying  that  the 
war  is  due  to  general  causes  and  especially  to  the  "capitalist"  order 
of  society.  .  .  . 

Readers  who  approve  of  some  parts  of  the  statement  and  object 
to  others,  must  remember  that  it  is  addressed  primarily  to  the  labor 


ALLIED  LABOR'S  WAR  AIMS  73 

socialists  of  enemy  countries,  and  that  it  speaks  a  language  to  which 
they  are  accustomed.  It  is  not  the  voice  of  the  nation;  it  represents 
a  point  of  view,  and  if  it  occasionally  ascends  into  a  somewhat  nebu- 
lous atmosphere,  that  does  not  weaken  the  firm  and  positive  stand 
taken  on  essential  matters.  As  a  whole,  it  offers  far  more  ground 
for  satisfaction  than  for  objection. 

The  differences  between  the  new  international  statement  and  the 
British  memorandum  adopted  in  December  are  considerable  and 
important.  As  we  hav.e  said,  the  earlier  draft  has  been  amplified  and 
strengthened  in  detail  and  its  logical  sequence  has  been  much  im- 
proved. The  first  important  difference  is  the  prominent  place  as- 
signed to  the  project  of  a  League  of  Nations.  That  is  a  project 
which  has  been  put  forward  by  President  Wilson  and  by  many  other 
persons,  but  it  has  not,  so  far  as  we  know,  been  previously  laid  down 
so  explicitly  and  in  so  much  detail.  It  is  postulated  as  the  future 
guardian  of  democracy  and  the  key  to  the  problem  of  preventing 
war  forever.  Further,  it  is  to 'be  the  agency  by  which  the  principle 
of  self-determination  for  nations  is  to  be  realized.  It  is  forcibly 
urged  that  the  right  of  self-determination  would  be  valueless  if  it 
were  at  the  mercy  of  fresh  violation,  and  therefore  that  it  must  be 
protected  by  a  super-national  authority,  which  only  the  proposed 
league  can  supply.  But,  more  than  that,  it  is  contended  that  the 
establishment  of  an  effective  super-national  authority  implies  the 
complete  democratization  of  all  countries,  with  the  abolition  of  auto- 
cratic powers  and  other  features  of  the  present  or  past  politics  of 
nations.  It  follows  that  if  self-determination  and  the  prevention  of 
future  wars  depend  on  the  establishment  of  a  League  of  Nations 
wielding  effective  authority,  and  if  this  in  turn  involves  complete 
democratization  of  the  nations  adhering  to  it,  then  it  is  evident  that 
the  first  step  towards  the  realization  of  the  ideals  set  out  is  democ- 
ratization. This  means,  when  applied  to  the  actual  conditions  before 
us,  either  that  Germany  must  first  be  thoroughly  democratized  be- 
fore any  progress  can  be  made,  or  that  the  League  of  Nations, 
formed  without  her,  must  be  prepared  to  compel  her  compliance  by 
force  of  arms.  We  agree.  A  League  of  Nations  would  be  a  farce 
with  Germany  as  she  is,  ruled  by  a  single  will,  cherishing  boundless 
ambitions,  restrained  by  no  scruples,  bound  by  no  compact,  owning 
no  law  but  necessity,  and  armed  to  the  teeth.  .  .  . 


CHAPTER   X 

two-edged:  sword  or  ploughshare 

Turn  now,  from  platform  to  procedure.  In  the  first  place, 
Allied  labor  believed  the  principles  in  its  platform  were  worth 
fighting  for.  That  was  the  first  edge  of  the  labor  blade.  Against 
the  Prussian  embodiment  of  conquest,  of  punitive  indemnities  and 
subjugated  peoples,  they  would  have  been  found  resisting  with  the 
last  ounce  of  blood  and  brawn,  had  other  elements  in  the  com- 
munity been  willing  to  sacrifice  the  East  for  the  West,  and  throw 
the  war  at  cost  of  the  principles  for  which  they  were  fighting.  In 
this  sense,  we  have  the  paradox  that  by  their  peace  aims,  the  work- 
ers made  it  essentially  their  war.  In  February,  1915,  a  conference 
of  Socialist  and  Labour  Parties  of  the  Allied  nations  had  recited 
the  wrongs  to  Belgium  and  Poland  and  declared  that  "throughout 
all  Europe  from  Alsace-Lorraine  to  the  Balkans,  those  populations 
that  have  been  annexed  by  force  shall  receive  the  right  freely  to 
dispose  of  themselves."  Three  years  to  a  month  later,  the  Inter-Allied 
Labour  and  Socialist  Conference  in  London  reaffirmed  that  labor 
was  "inflexibly  resolved  to  fight  until  victory  is  achieved  to  accom- 
plish their  task  of  liberation." 

Vorwdrts  did  not  make  the  mistake  of  those  reactionaries  who 
attacked  Henderson  as  a  defeatist.  Vorwdrts  charged  that  he 
"preaches  the  aim  of  reconciliation,  but  does  so  raising  the  fist  of 
enduring  readiness  for  war."  Renaudel,  the  French  majority  leader, 
was  quoted  as  saying  in  the  spring  of  19 18  that  it  brooked  little 
should  Germany  yield  the  provinces  wrested  from  France  in  1870 
if  half  a  dozen  new  Alsace-Lorraines  were  set  up  in  the  East.  Said 
Vandervelde  at  London,  in  words  which  forecast  the  impending 
German  drive: 

We  are  meeting  in  very  serious  times.  At  the  time  this  confer- 
ence assembled,  it  was  stated  in  the  newspapers  that  all  the  forces 
of  imperial  Germany  were  to  be  thrown  against  Paris.  On  that  very 
day  we  also  learned  that  the  Russian  revolution,  overcome  by  the 
weight  of  its  own  miseries,  and  its  own  mistakes,  had  resigned  itself 
to  the  signing  of  peace  with  the  Hapsburgs  and  the  Hohenzollerns. 
We  cannot  ignore  what  the  Bolshevikists  have  done  to  discredit 
their  own  country  and  international  socialism,  but  we  must  not  for- 

74 


TWO-EDGED:  SWORD  OR  PLOUGHSHARE  75 

get,  on  the  other  hand,  what  the  Russian  revolution  has  done  for 
internationalism  and  socialism.  In  the  splendor  of  its  first  triumph, 
it  proclaimed  those  principles  which,  adopted  by  President  Wilson, 
will  form  the  basis  of  the  democratic  peace  of  to-morrow. 

But  we  have  more  to  do  than  to  congratulate  ourselves  on  the 
achievement  of  the  Russian  revolution ;  we  must  also  draw  lessons 
from  its  failures.  The  great  lesson  is  that  democracy  was  commit- 
ting an  irretrievable  mistake  by  throwing  away  its  arms  before  im- 
perialism had  been  defeated.  Whilst  holding  the  olive  branch  in  one 
hand,  we  have  to  hold  the  sword  in  the  other.  We  have  been  forced 
to  take  up  the  sword  as  the  only  means  of  defense.  We  must  not 
forget  that  if  we  are  able  to  assemble  here,  it  is  because  the  British 
navy  holds  the  seas,  and  the  millions  of  allied  soldiers  maintain  the 
line.  If  the  German  offensive  were  to  succeed  the  resolutions  we 
pass  would  be  mere  "scraps  of  paper"  and  of  no  more  value  than 
the  bank  notes  of  the  Russian  state  bank.  If  our  soldiers  are  able 
to  throw  back  the  attack  with  which  we  are  threatened,  we  shall 
have  the  glorious  opportunity  of  taking  a  leading  part  in  the  effort 
that  can  then  be  made  to  attain  a  just  and  democratic  peace. 

To  Vandervelde,  beside  him  on  the  platform,  Ramsay  Mac- 
Donald  said  in  his  speech  at  Nottingham  in  January: 

We  can  assure  him  that  however  we  may  differ  in  some  things, 
there  is  no  difference  between  him  and  us  regarding  national  self- 
determination;  no  difference  between  him  and  us  that  Belgium  must 
be  free  and  independent.  If  we  made  peace  to-day  without  that, 
peace  would  be  false,  and  in  two  or  three  years  militarism  would 
raise  its  head  more  devilish  than  ever  before. 

This  edge  of  the  British-Allied  labor  blade  was  driven  home  in 
April,  19 1 8,  as  part  of  the  general  marshaling  of  Allied  arms  to 
meet  the  shock  of  the  German  drive  toward  Amiens  and  Paris.  The 
executive  committee  of  the  British  Labour  Party  that  month  passed 
this  resolution: 

Resolved,  That  the  National  Executive  of  the  Labour  Party  places 
on  record  its  deep  sense  of  gratitude  for,  and  admiration  of,  the 
heroic  resistance  offered  by  our  armies  in  the  field  to  the  terrible 
onslaughts  of  the  enemy  during  the  recent  offensive.  Such  magnifi- 
cent courage  and  resolution — so  consistent  with  the  best  British  tra- 
ditions— imposes  an  imperative  obligation  upon  all  sections  of  the 
country  to  assist  by  their  skill,  energy  or  substance,  to  carry  on  the 
great  work  of  liberation  in  v.hich  our  armies  are  engaged  in  order 
that  our  joint  efforts  may  eventually  result  in  the  final  overthrow 
of  militarism  and  secure  for  the  world  a  lasting  and  democratic  peace. 

With  the  development  of  implements  of  warfare,  from  cross- 
bow to  gunpowder,  from  gunpowder  to  high  explosives,  to  airplanes 


76  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

and  submarines,  it  is  not  strange  that  modern  labor  should  have  set 
out  to  improve  upon  the  ancient  anvils  on  which  swords  were  labori- 
ously pounded  into  ploughshares,  and  to  fashion  an  implement 
which  could  serve  both  purposes  at  once;  two-edged:  sword  or 
ploughshare. 

The  Inter- Allied  labor  meeting  in  191 5  had  resolved  to  resist 

any  attempt  to  transform  this  defensive  war  into  a  war  of  conquest, 
which  would  only  prepare  fresh  conflicts,  create  new  grievances  and 
subject  various  peoples  more  than  ever  to  the  double  plague  of 
armaments  and  wars. 

In  the  three  years  intervening,  the  workers  had  marked  the  grasp- 
ing of  French  imperialists  after  the  left  bank  of  the  Rhine;  they 
had  learned  of  the  claims  of  Italy  for  the  East  shore  of  the 
Adriatic,  for  Smyrna  and  what  not;  they  had  learned,  through  the 
Russian  exposures,  of  the  secret  treaties  for  the  parcelling  out  of 
the  Turkish  Empire,  and  underlined  not  only  the  booty  for  the 
Mediterranean  Allies  and  the  Czar,  but  those  paragraphs  where 
"Great  Britain  obtains";  they  had  seen  the  jingo  press  from  Allied 
countries  circulated  in  Germany  by  Pan-Germans,  as  part  of  the 
junker  propaganda  to  convince  the  German  people  that  theirs  was 
a  war  against  annihilation. 

So  in  19 1 8  the  Allied  workers  did  more  than  reaffirm  their 
resolve  to  resist  the  transformation  of  a  defensive  war  into  a  war 
of  conquest.  They  "condemned  the  aims  of  conquest  of  Italian 
imperialists,"  they  "condemned  the  imperialist  aims  of  govern- 
ments and  capitalists  who  would  make  of  .  .  .  territories  now 
dominated  by  the  Turkish  hordes  merely  instruments  either  of 
exploitation  or  militarism";  they  disclaimed  any  intention  to  "pur^ 
sue  the  political  and  economic  crushing  of  Germany";  they  dis- 
claimed as  a  war  aim  "dismemberment  of  Austria-Hungary  or  its 
deprivation  of  economic  access  to  the  sea";  declared  against  "all 
the  projects  now  being  prepared  by  imperialists  and  capitalists,  not 
in  any  one  country  but  in  most  countries,"  for  an  economic  "war 
after  the  war."  But  they  did  more  than  resist  and  denounce;  they 
came  forward  with  a  series  of  affirmative  proposals,  whose  reason- 
ableness and  freedom  from  imperialistic  taint  they  believed  must 
awaken  response  from  such  chords  of  democratic  feeling  as  might 
persist  in  Central  Europe.  They  set  out  to  press  for  a  joint  state- 
ment from  the  Allied  governments  to  match  the  statement  British 
labor  had  eUcited  from  the  Premier  and  to  match  the  14  points 
through  which  President  Wilson  had  not  only  spoken  for  the  United 
States,  but  voiced  the  democratic  aspirations  of  inarticulate  forces 
for  democracy  among  all  the  Allies.     More,  pending  such  a  joint 


TWO-EDGED:  SWORD  OR  PLOUGHSHARE  77 

pronouncement  on  the  part  of  the  Allied  governments,  they  forged 
their  labor  weapon  to  the  same  end,  and  in  the  British  labor  offen- 
sive, we  had  a  two-edged  implement  whose  blade  clove  at  once  for 
war  and  peace. 

To  labor's  mind,  the  principles  in  their  platform  were  not  only 
worth  fighting  for;  they  were  worth  pressing  home  with  all  the 
moral  and  political  force  they  could  muster.  By  the  issuance  of 
the  Inter-Allied  platform  they  sought  to  turn  the  hard  pan  of  Ger- 
man official  control  and  reach  the  soil  of  working  class  opinion 
beneath.  It  was  the  proposal  of  an  interbelligerent  labor  meeting, 
safeguarded,  while  the  war  was  on,  that  was  the  ploughshare  edge 
of  their  blade. 

The  New  Republic  in  publishing  the  London  memorandum  in 
full  as  a  sujDplement  on  March  23,  1918,  put  the  tactic  in  a  nut- 
Bhell: 

Just  as  the  labor  and  socialist  parties  of  the  western  Allies  have 
succeeded,  where  their  governments  have  failed,  in  reaching  a 
common  statement  of  war  aims,  so  the  labor  and  socialist  parties 
of  the  whole  world  may  reach  a  similar  agreement  in  spite  of  the 
chasm  which  still  divides  the  belligerent  governments. 

But  here,  again,  we  can  turn  to  outside  English  witnesses  of 
standing.  At  the  opening  of  the  London  Conference  (February, 
19 18)  the  London  Times  chronicled  the  British  labor  offensive  in 
all  but  the  same  words  as  employed  in  Chapter  II,  which  at  the 
time  they  were  published  in  The  Survey  (March  9,  1918)  were  de- 
nounced in  some  quarters  in  America  as  a  perversion  of  the  facts. 
The  Times  began: 

The  present  conference  of  labor  and  Socialist  parties  represent- 
ing the  Allied  countries  is  evidently  guided  by  skilful  hands.  They 
have  gone  to  work  in  a  methodical  and  purposeful  way,  very  dif- 
ferent from  the  crude  and  impetuous  attempt  to  hold  a  general  in- 
ternational meeting  at  Stockholm  last  summer.  It  is  clear  now  that 
if  the  meeting  then  proposed  had  been  held  it  would  have  been  a 
Babel  of  discordant  voices  expressing  irreconcilable  views  in  diverse 
tongues  and  with  extreme  heat.  .  .  .  The  project  fell  through  at 
the  outset  because  no  preliminary  agreement  could  be  reached  in 
this  country  among  the  intended  delegates.  The  problem  of  over- 
coming this  initial  difficulty  has  occupied  the  best  heads  among  them 
during  the  ensuing  six  months,  and  substantial  progress  has  been 
made  along  a  very  laborious  road.  .  .  . 

Of  the  whole  procedure,  the  Manchester  Guardian  of  February 
25  said: 


78  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

It  is  a  sound  and  practical  program  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that 
none  of  the  Allied  governments  will  raise  any  objection  to  its  being 
carried  out.     It  ought,  on  the  contrary,  to  be  welcomed  by  all. 

While  the  conference  was  on,  the  London  Daily  News  held  that 

the  importance  of  the  agreement  there  is  every  prospect  of  attain- 
ing at  the  present  conference  can  hardly  be  over-rated.  .  .  . 

There  are  certain  services  to  the  world  which  only  democracy 
can  render.  No  appeal,  no  warning,  no  menace  from  the  British 
government,  or  the  French,  or  even  the  American,  will  detach  a 
single  German  democrat  from  his  allegiance  to  the  Kaiser.  If  Ger- 
man democracy  is  to  be  kept  true,  or  made  true,  to  democratic  prin- 
ciple, it  must  be  by  the  establishment  of  a  frank  understanding  with 
the  democracies  of  England  and  Italy  and  America  and  France. 
If  Russia  is  to  be  saved  even  yet  from  the  cataclysmic  disasters  that 
threaten  her,  it  can  only  be  as  she  establishes  with  western  democ- 
racy relations  she  will  never  countenance  with  western  governments. 

In  discussing  the  project  of  an  international  labor  conference, 
the  London  Times  called  attention  to  points  which  "must  be  given 
consideration,"  such  as  that  enemy  labor  might  "return  specious 
answers"  which  would  have  to  be  "carefully  scrutinized  before  going 
further."  Nonetheless,  this  is  what  The  Times  said  of  the  pro- 
cedure which  was  determined  upon  and  which,  if  this  British  journal 
closely  identified  with  the  administration  found  worth  fair  discus- 
sion, would  seem  at  least  to  have  warranted  a  fair  hearing  from 
American  labor  bodies: 

Let  us,  therefore,  suppose  again  that  the  Allied  labor  declaration 
of  war  aims  is  brought  to  the  notice  of  the  corresponding  bodies  in 
the  enemy  countries.  The  first  object  is  to  extract  an  answer  from 
them  which  will  show  their  real  position,  and  if  that  agrees  in  any 
measure  with  the  Allied  labor  views,  then  to  proceed  further  with 
negotiations  and  attempt  the  international  meeting.  The  eventual 
object  appears  to  be  to  convince  the  enemy  labor  representatives 
that  they  have  been  deceived  by  their  own  government  and  that  no 
intention  of  crushing  or  ruining  them  is  cherished  on  this  side;  that 
what  we  are  fighting  against  is  German  "militarism"  and  the  gospel 
of  force  which  it  represents. 

That  is  a  fair  and  proper  object  which  has  been  pursued  by 
President  Wilson  and  others;  and  not  only  have  the  labor  organiza- 
tions a  right  to  pursue  it  too,  but  they  can  in  some  respects  do  so 
more  effectively  than   statesmen  or  governments.   .  .  . 

Arthur  Henderson,  in  speaking  at  the  closing  luncheon  at  Lon- 
don, said: 


TWO-EDGED:  SWORD  OR  PLOUGHSHARE  79 

In  spite  of  cajolery  and  misrepresentation,  we  say  to  our  critics: 
After  nearly  four  years  of  ruthless  slaughter  and  destruction,  in 
which  humanity  is  slowly  bleeding  to  death,  it  is  time  that  the  mili- 
tary effort  was  seriously  supplemented — not  superseded  or  supplanted, 
but  seriously  supplemented — by  the  pressure  of  the  moral  and  the 
political  weapon.  It  appears  to  us  that  the  interests  of  all  the  na- 
tions involved  in  the  struggle  and  the  interests  of  humanity  as  a 
whole  render  it  imperative  that  the  war  should  cease  the  moment  the 
conditions  of  a  world-peace  are  assured. 

As  I  understand  the  position  of  Allied  labor,  it  is  this:  We  seek 
a  victory;  but  we  do  not  seek  a  victory  of  a  militarist  or  diplomatic 
nature.  We  seek  a  triumph  for  great  principles  and  noble  ideals. 
We  are  not  influenced  by  imperialist  ambitions  or  selfish  national  in- 
terests. We  seek  a  victory;  but  it  must  be  a  victory  for  international 
moral  and  spiritual  forces,  finding  its  expression  in  a  peace  based 
upon  the  inalienable  rights  of  common  humanity.  By  the  acceptance 
of  the  amended  war  aims,  the  Inter-Allied  Conference  has  declared 
that,  whilst  we  are  unprepared  to  continue  the  conflict  for  an  im- 
perialistic peace  for  the  Allies,  neither  would  we  consent  to  the  ac- 
ceptance of  terms  which  would  mean  a  German  militarist  peace.  We 
have  made  our  declarations  of  policy  in  good  faith,  repudiating  all 
deceit  and  cunning.  We  shall  refuse  to  countenance  any  attempt  by 
either  group  of  belligerents  to  defeat  the  principles  for  which  we 
stand.  We  shall  oppose  any  unscrupulous  application  of  these  prin- 
ciples to  any  particular  cases  in  which  any  country  may  be  inter- 
ested. We  shall  continue  to  press  our  case  against  all  opposition, 
whether  it  be  internal  or  external,  in  order  that  we  may  eventually 
secure  that  constructive,  democratic  peace  so  essential  to  social  and 
economic  progress  the  world  over. 

In  order  to  secure  such  a  peace  we  are  ready  to  cooperate  on 
the  principles  of  conciliation  with  all  elements,  whether  they  be 
Allied,  neutral,  or  amongst  the  belligerent  peoples.  All  peoples  we 
are  prepared  to  cooperate  with  who  are  inspired  by  principles  iden- 
tical with  those  upon  which  our  peace  proposals  are  based.  Doubt- 
less we  shall  again  be  charged  with  pacifism,  and  told  that  we  are 
playing  the  game  of  the  enemy.  Let  me  say  emphatically  that 
though  we  are  not  seeking  exclusively  a  French  peace,  an  Italian 
peace,  or  a  British  peace,  we  are  all  of  us,  I  believe,  much  more 
strongly  opposed  to  a  German  peace.  Nor  do  we  want  "peace  at  any 
price." 

We  must  do  everything  in  our  power  to  hold  an  international  con- 
ference under  proper  conditions,  and  as  speedily  as  circumstances 
will  permit.  We  must  use  that  international  conference  as  an  op- 
portunity for  removing  every  obstacle  that  stands  in  the  way  of  an 
honorable,   just,  world-settlement. 

One  of  the  most  consistent  criticisms  leveled  at  Allied  diplomacy 
had  been  that  of  Andre  Cheradame,  who  from  an  angle  very  differ- 
ent from  that  of  labor,  charged  it  with  ignoring  the  social  and 


8o  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

psychological  factors  in  the  common  assault  upon  an  enemy  that 
has  used  both.  Among  national  spokesmen,  it  remained  for  Wood- 
row  Wilson  to  link  military  and  political  offensives.  In  a  sense  his 
state  papers,  after  the  United  States  entered  the  war,  fall  into  two 
groups — those  in  which  he  made  ringing  call  to  arms  against  Prus- 
sian aggression,  and  those  in  which  he  set  forth  the  principles  which 
''would  be  our  own  in  the  final  settlement."  To  a  remarkable 
degree  the  two  were  blended  in  his  address  at  Baltimore  in  April, 
19 18,  on  the  first  anniversary  of  America's  entry  into  the  war;  and 
its  two-edged  blade  afforded  a  master  type  of  the  new  statesman- 
ship. In  this  address  he  yielded  no  ground  to  those  who  had  crit- 
icized his  moral  and  political  offensive.  Still  less  did  he  yield 
ground  to  the  German  thrust  at  Amiens.  Rather,  he  accepted  the 
latter  challenge  and  threw  it  back.  In  doing  so,  he  made  clear 
that  instead  of  confusing  the  issue,  his  enunciation  of  the  fourteen 
points  and  the  four,  and  the  other  steps  in  his  moral  and  political 
offensive,  grounded  as  that  was  on  his  remarkable  understanding  of 
the  psychology  of  democracy,  had  made  the  issue  clear  as  never 
before. 

As  one  edge  of  his  blade,  we  find  him  throwing  over  the  mo- 
tivation of  hate — that  recourse  of  the  German  autocrats  which  had 
found  an  echo  from  not  a  few  of  our  own  lesser  spokesmen.  'T 
should  be  ashamed,"  he  said,  "in  the  presence  of  affairs  so  grave, 
so  fraught  with  the  destinies  of  mankind  throughout  all  the  world, 
to  speak  with  truculence,  to  use  the  weak  language  of  hatred  or 
vindictive  purpose."  Rather,  his  was  an  appeal  to  reason.  His 
basic  confidence  lay  in  the  ability  of  thinking  Americans  to  make 
up  their  minds.  "The  man  who  knows  least,"  he  said,  "can  now 
see  plainly  how  the  cause  of  justice  stands,  and  what  imperishable 
thing  he  is  asked  to  invest  in."  He  reviewed  the  exchanges  which 
had  helped  bring  this  education  about  and,  in  doing  so,  reaffirmed 
the  unimperialistic  principles  for  which  America  stood — in  a  way 
which  at  the  time  may  be  said  to  have  been  an  answer  to  such 
organs  as  the  Giornale  d'ltalm,  which  had  doggedly  clung  to  the 
commitments  by  the  Allies  to  Italy;  and  an  answer  to  the  London 
Globe,  which  before  the  ink  was  fairly  dry  on  the  statements  put 
out  by  Premier  Lloyd  George  and  President  Wilson  at  New  Year's, 
urged  their  recall  on  the  ground,  apparently,  that  German  conquests 
in  the  East  should  be  eyed  for  an  eye  with  prospect  of  counter 
conquests. 

As  against  those  who  thus  pinned  their  faith  on  dark  threats 
of  punishment  as  means  to  weaken  enemy  resistance  and  to  build 
up  the  fighting  spirit  at  home,  President  Wilson  reaffirmed  his  con- 
trary principles  and  alternative  procedure: 


TWO-EDGED:  SWORD  OR  PLOUGHSHARE  8i 

...  I  have  sought  to  learn  the  objects  Germany  has  in  this  war 
from  the  mouths  of  her  own  spokesmen,  and  to  deal  as  frankly  with 
them  as  I  wished  them  to  deal  with  me.  .  .  . 

We  have  ourselves  proposed  no  injustice,  no  aggression.  We 
are  ready,  whenever  the  final  reckoning  is  made,  to  be  just  to  the 
German  people,  deal  fairly  with  the  German  power,  as  with  all 
others.  There  can  be  no  difference  between  peoples  in  the  final 
judgment,  if  it  is  indeed  to  be  a  righteous  judgment.  To  propose 
anything  but  justice,  even-handed  and  dispassionate  justice,  to  Ger- 
many at  any  time,  whatever  the  outcome  of  the  war,  would  be  to 
renounce  and  dishonor  our  own  cause,  for  we  ask  nothing  that  we 
are  not  willing  to  accord. 

He  went  further  and  reopened  the  door  which  the  German 
commanders  in  Russia  clanged  shut  "when  we  proposed  such  a 
peace:" 

For  myself,  I  am  ready,  ready  still,  ready  even  now,  to  discuss 
a  fair  and  just  and  honest  peace  at  any  time  that  it  is  sincerely 
purposed — a  peace  in  which  the  strong  and  the  weak  shall  fare 
alike. 

Here,  then,  were  the  main  elements  in  President  Wilson's  moral 
and  political  offensive.  Here,  also,  they  became  basic  elements  in 
his  military  offensive,  the  other  edge  of  his  blade.  And  in  making 
this  clear  he  once  more  spoke  over  the  heads  of  the  German  general 
staff  to  the  civilians  of  the  Central  Empires  at  the  same  time  that 
he  mustered  the  American  civilian  soldiers  afresh  to  their  task: 

It  has  been  with  this  thought  that  I  have  sought  to  learn  from 
those  who  spoke  for  Germany  whether  it  was  justice  or  dominion 
and  the  execution  of  their  own  will  upon  the  other  nations  of  the 
world  that  the  German  leaders  were  seeking.  They  have  answered — ■ 
answered  in  unmistakable  terms.  They  have  avowed  that  it  was 
not  justice,  but  dominion  and  the  unhindered  execution  of  their  own 
will.  The  avowal  has  not  come  from  Germany's  statesmen.  It  has 
come  from  her  military  leaders,  who  are  her  real  rulers. 

How  these  "military  masters"  overrode  the  German  civilian 
delegates  at  Brest-Litovsk,  how  in  Russia,  in  Finland,  in  Ukraine 
and  Rumania  they  sought  to  "impose  their  power  and  exploit  every- 
thing for  their  own  use  and  aggrandizement,"  how  they  would  do 
the  same  thing  on  the  western  front  if  they  had  the  chance,  how 
they  might  be  willing  to  promote  a  false  peace  in  the  West  if  they 
could  have  free  hand  in  making  the  Slavic  lands,  the  Baltic  penin- 
sula and  Turkey  "subject  to  their  will  and  ambition,  and  build 
upon  that  dominion  an  empire  of  force  upon  which  they  fancy  that 


82  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

they  can  then  erect  an  empire  of  gain  and  commercial  supremacy," 
were  set  forth  by  President  Wilson  as  so  many  elements  in  a  pro- 
gram in  which  "our  ideals  of  justice  and  humanity  and  liberty,  the 
principle  of  free  self-determination  of  nations,  upon  which  all  the 
modern  Vv^orld  insists,  can  play  no  part." 

That  program  once  carried  out,  America  and  all  who  care  or 
dare  to  stand  with  her  must  arm  and  prepare  themselves  to  contest 
the  mastery  of  the  world — a  mastery  in  which  the  rights  of  com- 
mon men,  the  rights  of  women  and  of  all  who  are  weak,  must  for 
the  time  being  be  trodden  under  foot  and  disregarded  and  the  old, 
age-long  struggle  for  freedom  and  right  begin  again  at  its  beginning. 

And  in  conclusion  he  said: 

.  .  .  Germany  has  once  more  said  that  force,  and  force  alone, 
shall  decide  whether  justice  and  peace  shall  reign  in  the  affairs  of 
men,  whether  right  as  America  conceives  it  or  dominion  as  she  con- 
ceives it  shall  determine  the  destinies  of  mankind.  There  is,  there- 
fore, but  one  response  possible  from  us :  Force,  force  to  the  utmost, 
force  without  stint  or  limit,  the  righteous  and  triumphant  force 
which  shall  make  right  the  law  of  the  world  and  cast  every  selfish 
dominion  down  in  the  dust. 

Operating  in  the  workaday  field,  rather  than  in  that  of  official 
statesmanship,  British  labor  was  employing  a  formula  kindred  to 
that  of  the  American  President.  There  has  been  a  great  deal  of 
discussion  of  morale.  Much  of  it  has  had  that  naive  ring  to  it  with 
which  some  people  discuss  welfare  work  as  a  solution  of  the  labor 
problem.  British  workers  did  not  take  stock  in  cigarettes  or  soup- 
kitchens  or  hate  as  a  method  of  building  up  morale  either  among 
soldiers  or  citizens.  They  were  out  for  justice — justice  first  of  all 
in  their  own  war  aims.  Rightly  or  wrongly,  they  believed  that  if 
(in  191 7)  the  war  aims  given  out  in  December  had  been  given 
out  in  May,  there  would  have  been  a  good  chance  that  the  pro- 
visional government  under  Kerensky  would  not  have  gone  down 
or  the  cave-in  on  the  Russian  front  resulted.  They  believed  that 
the  same  type  of  mind  which  fell  short  there  and  which  expressed 
itself  in  the  secret  treaties  would  never  weaken  the  bonds  which 
held  the  German  working  people  in  leash  to  their  overlords.  "How," 
they  asked,  "are  you  to  counter  the  German  imperialists  at  home 
if  Allied  labor  does  not  make  clear,  by  forcing  a  united  unimperial- 
istic  statement  of  war  aims  from  the  Allies,  that  the  German  work- 
ing-classes will  not  be  opening  the  way  to  the  destruction  of  Ger- 
many if  they  revolt,  or  threaten  to  do  so;  how  if  Allied  labor  does 
not  make  clear  that  it  can  and  will  hold  its  governments  to  this 


TWO-EDGED:  SWORD  OR  PLOUGHSHARE  83 

course;  how  if  it  does  not  endeavor  to  get  these  things  across  to  the 
German  socialists?" 

In  his  Washington's  Birthday  address  on  February  22,  19 18, 
Samuel  Gompers,  president  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor, 
was  quoted  as  saying: 

Shall  we  meet  in  council  with  these  men  [German  labor],  gain- 
ing from  us  our  confidence,  swerving  us  from  the  path  of  duty,  try- 
ing to  influence  us  that  the  governments  of  these  democracies  are, 
after  all,  only  capitalistic?  I  have  said,  and  I  say  in  the  name  of  the 
American  labor  movement :  "You  can't  talk  peace  with  us  now. 
Either  you  smash  your  autocracy,  or,  by  the  gods,  we  will  smash  it 
for  you.  Before  you  talk  peace  terms,  get  back  from  France,  get 
back  from  Belgium,  into  Germany,  and  then  we  will  talk  peace." 

This  left  the  British  labor  leaders  cold.  They  believed  them- 
selves at  work  on  a  procedure  which  would  do  more  than  swash- 
buckling to  achieve  the  very  ends  Gompers  desired.  They 
understood  the  American  feeling,  as  they  went  through  it  what 
seemed  to  them  ages  before.  They  were  scarcely  of  a  temper  to 
wait  inactive  while  American  labor  should  go  through  a 
similar  tuition.  Their  own  experience  with  the  grapples  of  govern- 
ment control  in  war-time  had  given  them  a  notion  of  the  Prussian 
hold  upon  the  German  workers.  British  labor  was  freer — and  pro- 
posed to  use  its  fuller  measure  of  freedom  so  that  the  less  free 
might  act  in  turn.  You  heard  among  them  little  of  atrocities  linked 
with  the  civilian  common  soldiers  who  now  made  up  the  bulk  of  the 
German  armies.  That  motive,  fanned  too  hard  earlier  in  the  war, 
had  burned  itself  out.  They  thought  the  men  the  British  were 
fighting  against  were  much  like  themselves,  caught  in  the  grip  of 
war,  neither  fiends  nor  made  of  other  clay.  So  long  as  the  German 
workers  were  held  by  powers  greater  than  themselves  to  an  assault 
upon  democracy  and  were  thrown  at  the  western  workers,  so  long 
would  these  shoot  and  be  shot. 

The  British  was  the  antithesis  of  the  Russian  method  of  bring- 
ing about  a  change.  They  did  not  propose  to  down  tools  or  down 
arms  at  home  as  the  method  of  bringing  the  German  workers 
around.  They  believed  that  the  German  armies  would  be  in  Paris 
and  in  London  quick  enough  if  the  French  and  English  workers 
downed  tools  or  arms.  The  Russian  developments  confirmed  them 
in  this  belief.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  they  were  equally  of  the 
belief  that  the  EngHsh  and  French  armies  would  make  for  Berlin 
if  the  German  workers  revolted.  So,  therefore,  they  were  engaged 
in  the  slow  process  of  forcing  the  Allied  governments  to  come  out 
singly  and  unitedly  in  a  statement  for  an  unimperialistic  settle- 


84  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

ment,  in  the  process  of  showing  that  the  Allied  working  classes  had 
enough  strength  to  hold  them  to  it,  and  in  the  process  of  getting 
word  of  these  things  through  to  the  German  workers  in  a  way 
which  would  carry  conviction. 

Their  first  objective  was  to  get  unanimity  among  the  great  Brit- 
ish labor  organizations.    That  was  reached  in  December,  191 7. 

Their  second  objective  was  to  get  unanimity  among  the  labor 
and  socialist  groups  among  the  Allies.  That  was  reached  in  Feb- 
ruary, 19 18. 

Their  third  objective  was  to  promote  the  convincing  espousal 
by  the  organized  German  workers  of  those  principles  of  a  people's 
peace  they  had  made  their  own.  On  that  hung  their  fourth  ob- 
jective— to  get  unanimity  among  the  workers  of  all  Europe  on  a 
charter  of  democracy  embodying  those  principles  which  they  might 
press  as  the  basis  for  an  enduring  settlement  of  the  war;  a  war 
which,  because  of  those  principles,  they  supported. 

That  was  the  British  labor  sword — or  ploughshare,  as  you  will. 


CHAPTER   XI 

ANOTHER  ENGLISH   ROUND   TABLE 

Ramsay  MacDonald  was  speaking.  Before  him  was  a  great 
well  of  pipe  smoke  through  which  you  could  see,  row  upon  row, 
the  upturned  faces  of  broad-cheeked  British  labor  men.  Above 
them  in  a  horseshoe  was  a  gallery  of  cheering  spectators.  He  stood 
on  a  drop-balcony  at  the  end,  which  was  like  the  frog  of  the  horse- 
shoe— at  a  narrow  table  at  which  sat  a  dozen  men  facing  the  body 
of  the  hall.  There  was  the  Belgian  minister  of  Intendence;  there 
was  a  former  member  of  the  British  War  Cabinet;  there  was  the 
unrecognized  ambassador  of  the  latest  Russian  government;  there 
were  two  members  of  the  French  parliament;  and  several  times  that 
number  of  English  commoners.  They  were  all  labor  men  or  social- 
ists. 

"See  us  here,"  MacDonald  was  saying,  and  he  brought  down  the 
house,  "shoulder  to  shoulder;  disagreeing;  comrades  in  our  dis- 
agreements. And  when  you  think  that  the  extension  to  this  table 
by  a  few  feet,  the  addition  to  these  chairs  by  half  a  dozen,  is  all 
that  it  means  to  bring  the  International  together,  in  the  name  of 
God,  let  us  think  of  this." 

In  these  phrases,  at  the  first  evening  meeting  at  Nottingham, 
he  gave  delegates  to  the  Labour  Party  convention  a  picture  which 
stuck  in  their  minds — which  was  referred  to  again  and  again  in  the 
discussions  of  the  next  three  days.  He  had  taken  his  fellow  mem- 
bers in  the  executive  of  the  British  Labour  Party  and  the  fraternal 
delegates  sitting  at  the  speakers'  table  beside  them,  and  turned 
them  into  what  the  exhibit  experts  call  a  three-dimension  piece. 
He  visualized  in  the  chairs,  the  table,  the  men  beside  it,  something 
undreamed  of  in  the  older  philosophies  of  war,  but  something  cher- 
ished and  familiar  to  the  gospel  of  working  class  brotherhood,  as 
spoken  in  a  score  of  tongues  since  the  days  of  Karl  Marx.  He 
visualized  an  international  labor  conference  in  the  midst  of  war, 
threshing  out  their  differences  either  to  agreement  or  to  a  final 
unbridged  cleavage;  an  international  labor  conference  at  the  time 
of  the  settlement  of  the  war,  whether  it  were  near  or  far,  standing 
out  for  a  workers'  peace. 

"We  do  not  want  a  peace  celebrated  by  sobs,"  he  went  on, 

85 


86  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

"but  a  peace  with  democratic  songs,  served  by  democratic  effort, 
built  up  by  democratic  principles;  a  peace  maintained  by  democratic 
vigilance.  ...  It  is  your  duty  to  speak  to  those  silent  to  maintain 
silence  no  longer,  to  come  together,  to  discuss  and  settle  difficul- 
ties." 

There  were  two  vacant  ends  to  that  Nottingham  table.  The 
absentees  at  one  end  were,  of  course,  any  representatives  of  the 
workers  of  Germany  and  Austria;  although  in  the  course  of  the 
evening  a  young  woman  spoke  for  the  rebel  Czech  element,  and 
hailed  the  British  workers'  message  to  Russia  as  kindred  to  the 
yearnings  of  their  "comrades  in  Bohemia."  Incidentally  she  brought 
news  of  a  resolution  in  favor  of  Czecho-Slovak  independence  adopted 
at  a  congress  of  all  Czech  deputies  from  Bohemia,  Moravia  and 
Silesia,  held  at  Prague  in  January,  which  had  been  entirely  sup- 
pressed by  the  Austrian  censor. 

The  absentees  at  the  other  end  of  the  table  were  those  of  the 
United  States.  Just  as  the  British  delegates  felt  that  war-time 
isolation  and  distance  were  factors  which  stood  in  the  way  of  any 
approach  to  the  working  classes  of  the  Central  Empires,  so  they  felt, 
a  month  later,  that  these  same  obstacles  were  factors  in  the  absence 
of  American  labor  alongside  the  Belgian,  French,  Italian  and  other 
Allied  labor  groups  who  made  common  cause  with  them  at  their 
London  conference  in  February. 

At  that  first  evening  at  Nottingham  it  was  the  fraternal  dele- 
gates who  spoke,  and  what  they  said  was  current  evidence  as  to  the 
various  angles  from  which  the  different  Allied  labor  and  socialist 
groups  approached  their  common  action. 

The  first  speaker  was  Camille  Huysmans,  who  represented  an- 
other and  earlier  approach  to  the  question  of  an  international  labor 
conference.  Before  the  war  he  was  secretary  of  the  International 
Socialist  Bureau  at  Brussels,  and  since,  secretary  of  the  Dutch- 
Scandinavian  committee  presided  over  by  Hjalmar  Branting  (the 
Swedish  Socialist  leader),  which  had  promoted  the  Stockholm  con- 
ferences. Huysmans'  arrival  in  England  was  noted  in  some  of  the 
London  papers  by  the  publication  of  paragraphs  describing  him  as 
pro-German  and  saying  that  he  had  gotten  out  of  occupied  Belgium 
on  a  German  pass.  The  fact  that  at  Nottingham  he  was  in  in- 
formal and  frequent  conference  with  Emile  Vandervelde,  member 
of  the  Belgian  ministry  which  is  known  to  have  turned  down 
repeated  overtures  for  a  separate  peace,  was  perhaps  sufficient  indi- 
cation that,  however  much  the  two  men  had  differed  in  policy,  his 
sincerity  commanded  the  respect  of  his  fellow  countrymen. 

Huysmans  brought  the  greetings  of  the  organizing  committee 
of  the  Stockholm  conference  project,  from  the  Socialists  of  Den- 


ANOTHER  ENGLISH  ROUND  TABLE  87 

mark,  Sweden,  Norway  and  Holland  and  that  part  of  the  Russian 
social  democracy  which  was  associated  with  them.  He  is  of  the 
slender  student  type  which  we  associate  with  what  Englishmen  call 
the  "intellectuals"  whether  in  socialist  meetings  or  university  halls. 
Above  his  glasses  is  a  high,  square  forehead  with  black  hair  thrown 
back.  A  long,  thin  neck  upholds  his  high-boned  face.  Even  when, 
at  the  outset  of  his  remarks,  he  raised  a  laugh  by  saying  that  he 
was  especially  happy  to  come  from  Stockholm  because  it  was  a 
"prohibited  area,"  there  was  only  a  momentary  relaxation  of  the 
sober  tension  of  the  man.  "The  fact  that  I  am  permitted  to  come 
to  Great  Britain,"  he  went  on,  "is  a  mark  of  the  confidence  which 
your  government  has  in  me.  I  regret  that  your  government  has 
not  so  much  confidence  in  you."  In  explaining  the  activities  of  the 
Stockholm  committee  he  said  (here  and  later,  quotations  are  very 
largely  from  long  hand  notes) : 

My  friends  had  the  impression,  and  it  was  also  the  impression  of 
a  man  who  is  a  devoted  friend  of  British  democracy — M.  Branting — 
that  in  the  capitalist  societies  war  organizations  are  like  iron  walls 
opposite  each  other,  unable  to  crush  one  another,  unable  to  have  a 
real  military  result.  If  we  had  this  conviction  that  militarism  had 
no  solution  unaided  in  itself,  then  there  was  need  of  another  way 
out.  This  conviction  has  been  deepened  by  events.  The  German 
and  Austrian  armies  from  the  east  are  now  cast  on  the  western 
front  where  the  forces  are,  to  a  certain  degree,  again  of  the  same 
strength. 

We  were  of  the  opinion  that  peace,  if  it  were  to  be  what  the 
workers  want,  ought  to  be  prepared  by  Socialists  and  labor  parties 
across  the  war,  and  drawn  up  in  such  a  manner  that  it  would  endure 
in  the  years  to  come.  This  policy  was  not  understood.  I  will  not 
defend  myself  against  what  has  been  said  in  leaflets  and  in  papers. 
According  to  some  we  were  sold  to  William  the  Second,  and  accord- 
ing to  others  we  were  the  tools  of  Poincare.  But  the  result  of  the 
contrary  policy  has  been  that  Russia  was  pushed  to  the  extreme  left 
wing.  We  thought  that  if  in  the  Entente  countries  there  was  a  clear 
statement  of  war  aims  and  a  general  agreement,  labor  at  last  in 
Germany  and  Austria  would  be  compelled  to  act  along  the  same 
lines  as  ourselves. 

I  know  that  the  moderate  statements  of  the  American  and  Eng- 
lish governments  of  late  have  made  more  impression  on  the  people 
than  the  German  and  Austrian  governments  have  acknowledged.  My 
comrades  charged  me  to  explain  these  points  and  to  say  that  we  ap- 
prove the  tactics  proposed  by  British  labor. 

In  conclusion,  Huysmans  said: 

You  have  a  great  responsibility.  It  depends  upon  you  whether  the 
International  shall  be  the  first  bridge  across  the  world;  whether  a 


88  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

new  International  shall  come  into  being,  greater,  stronger,  repre- 
senting all  working  classes,  all  peoples — an  International  which 
shall  be  across  the  world  what  your  British  Labour  Party  will  be  in 
your  own  country — the  leading  political  power. 

The  conference  had  shown  its  catholicity  by  inviting  two  Rus- 
sians— Litvinoff,  the  unrecognized  Bolsheviki  ambassador  (later 
arrested  by  the  British  but  let  go  in  return  for  the  release  of  Brit- 
ish representatives  in  Russia),  and  Roubanovitch,  the  most  impor- 
tant representative,  then  in  Western  Europe,  of  the  old  majority  in 
the  Constituent  Assembly.  Roubanovitch  could  not  come,  but  the 
Bolsheviki  had  their  spokesman — a  stocky,  heavy-set  Russian  Jew 
with  the  glasses  of  a  student  and  the  heavy  jaw  of  a  street  speaker. 

''I  come  before  you  no  longer  to  protest  against  the  friendship 
of  your  government  with  ours  as  in  the  past,"  began  Litvinoff,  re- 
ferring to  nine  years  under  the  Czar's  regime  he  had  spent  in  Lon- 
don as  an  exile.    He  went  on: 

Rather  I  stand  here  as  representative  of  a  government  the  like  of 
which  the  world  has  never  seen.  For  the  first  time  in  history  the 
proletariat  has  achieved  supreme  power  in  one  of  the  largest  states 
in  the  world.  I  pray  you,  comrades,  to  disabuse  yourselves  of  the 
notion  spread  by  the  capitalist  press  that  the  Bolsheviki  have  usurped 
power  like  a  band  of  thugs.  In  spite  of  sabotage  by  officials  of  the 
old  government,  they  have  carried  through  a  revolution  in  the  most 
approved  way;  and  if  they  were  a  band  of  adventurers  they  would 
have  been  thrown  out  long  ago. 

The  establishment  of  the  socialist  administration  may  seem  to 
you  miraculous  in  view  of  the  economic  backwardness  of  Russia, 
That  has  rather  made  it  possible.  The  capitalist  classes  had  not  at- 
tained full  power  or  sway  over  the  minds  of  the  working  classes. 
That  explains  the  hold  of  the  socialist  movement  in  1905.  It  was 
suppressed,  but  lived.  Nor  did  the  war  dampen  the  revolutionary 
spirit.  On  the  contrary,  the  capitalist  hunger  after  Constantinople 
and  Armenia  increased  the  hatred  of  the  working  classes  and  in- 
creased the  revolutionary  energy.  Theirs  was  a  revolution  not  only 
against  the  Czar  and  his  regime,  but  against  allied  capitalists. 

There  was  absolute  silence  among  the  upturned  British  faces 
before  him,  broken  only  now  and  then  by  hand-clapping  here  and 
there.  "The  Russian  workers,"  he  went  on,  "wanted  peace  as  well 
as  freedom  and  social  reform.  The  Russian  workers  revolted  not 
only  against  the  inexcusable  conduct  of  the  war,  but  against  the 
war  itself."  Here,  at  the  end  of  each  sentence,  the  crowd  burst 
into  cheers.    He  continued: 

They  revolted  against  the  war  by  revolting  against  its  authors 
and  advocates.    In  the  March  revolution  the  power  passed  into  the 


ANOTHER  ENGLISH  ROUND  TABLE  89 

hands  of  the  working  classes,  but  they  allowed  it  to  be  held  by  the 
liberals.  The  Bolsheviki  leaders  were  not  in  Russia.  They  were  in 
Siberia,  many  of  them.  Others,  like  Lenine  and  Trotzky,  were 
living  abroad,  unable  to  return  owing  to  obstacles  put  in  the  way 
by  the  Entente  governments.  Therefore,  the  only  leaders  were  the 
moderate  socialists  who  openly  advocated  the  cry  of  the  people  fof 
peace,  for  no  annexations,  no  indemnities  and  the  right  of  self- 
determination.     But  they  did  not  carry  these  things  out. 

So  the  masses  came  into  the  streets  again.  They  had  had  an 
object  lesson  in  depending  upon  moderate  socialists.  This  resulted 
in  putting  new  men  into  the  cabinet,  but  these  soon  became  the 
abject  slaves  of  the  liberals.  The  cry  for  peace  became  a  mere 
phrase;  a  badly  conceived  offensive  was  attempted;  the  arrest  of 
revolutionary  leaders   followed;  the  revolution  began  to  fizzle  out. 

Again  the  masses  came  into  the  streets.  If  the  revolution  had 
continued  to  drift  in  the  same  direction  it  would  have  given  rise  to 
the  restoration  of  the  monarchy.  The  laboring  classes  turned  their 
eyes  to  the  revolutionary  party  which  had  from  the  first  stood  for 
the  complete  power  of  the  Soviets.  On  the  night  of  November  7,  the 
government  under  Kerensky  was  transferred  to  the  Russian  Con- 
gress of  Soldiers'  and  Workers'  Delegates. 

Has  the  experiment  of  the  Russian  revolutionary  people  justified 
itself?  I  mention  one  word — Brest-Litovsk.  There,  in  that  little 
barrack  town,  greater  and  more  dramatic  history  has  been  made  in 
three  weeks  than  in  three  and  a  half  years  of  war.^  The  princi- 
ples of  no  annexation  and  the  right  of  the  people  to  determine 
their  lives  have  been  asserted  in  such  a  way  as  to  shatter  the  cap- 
italist war.  Even  if  peace  does  not  result  from  the  negotiations,  a 
revolution  in  Germany — and  let  me  hope  somewhere  else  ["Say  it 
again,"  came  a  cry  from  the  gallery]  becomes  one  of  the  immediate 
possibilities.  We  have  placed  the  German  people  face  to  face  with 
their  governments.  Either  they  must  accept  the  democratic  princi- 
ple or  continue  war  for  territorial  conquest.  Will  the  German  peo- 
ple accept  that  choice  or  spend  themselves  for  their  Junkers  and 
capitalists  to  the  end?  I  think  there  can  only  be  one  answer.  Al- 
ready we  hear  the  rumble  of  the  storm  coming  from  Austria  and 
Hungary. 

But  not  only  have  the  war  aims  of  the  Central  Powers  been  ex- 
posed ;  the  statesmen  of  the  allied  countries  have  been  forced  into 
the  open,  and  surely  these  exposures  must  have  their  effect  on  the 
minds  of  the  workers  of  the  world.  By  the  publication  of  their 
secret  treaties  the  governments  have  been  given  warning  that  their 
peoples  will  not  put  up  with  mere  machinations. 

Internally,  the  land  has  been  given  to  the  peasants;  factories  and 
lands  have  been  put  in  the  hands  of  the  workers;  the  apartments  of 
the  rich  have  been  made  to  supply  shelter  for  the  homeless;  local 

*  The  negotiations  at  Brest-Litovsk  dragged  along  till  the  first  week  in 
March,  1918;  six  weeks  after  this  Nottingham  meeting. 


06  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

government  has  been  put  in  the  hands  of  the  Soviets;  banking  has 
been  nationalized;  the  army  has  been  democratized  by  estabHshing 
the  principle  of  direct  election  of  officers.  The  full  right  of  self- 
determination  has  been  granted  to  all  nationalities. 

For  a  space  of  three  months  that  is  not  a  bad  record.  It  is  true 
it  has  not  been  wholly  carried  out  into  practice  in  the  face  of  cap- 
italistic sabotage.  It  is  also  true  that  if  reaction  sets  in  these  things 
will  be  swept  away.  Yet  is  it  not  true  that  the  Bolsheviki  have 
given  a  demonstration  to  the  workers  of  the  world? 

The  Russian  people  are  fighting  an  unequal  fight,  against  the 
imperialists  of  all  nations.  They  have  begun  a  work  for  general 
peace,  which  alone  they  cannot  finish.  They  will  fail  if  they  have 
not  the  response  of  the  workers  of  all  countries — those  of  the  Cen- 
tral Powers  as  well  as  the  Allies.  I  can  only  say  to  British  labor: 
Speed  up  your  pace.  I  hope  and  trust  that  you  will  not  allow  thou- 
sands and  millions  more  men  to  be  sacrificed. 

Thus  the  Maximalist  ambassador  was  given  a  hearing;  he  was 
given  applause.  But  his  speech  in  a  sense  served  to  demark  the 
Bolshevik  program  from  that  which  the  British  and  Allied  speakers 
who  followed  him  were  engaged  upon.  They  made  it  clear  that 
neither  in  internal  nor  in  international  procedure  did  they  see  eye 
to  eye  with  him.  It  was  with  other  forces  in  the  Russian  political 
life  that  they  were  bound  by  the  old  ties;  it  was  the  Russian 
Minimalists  who  cabled  acceptance  of  the  war  aims  adopted  at 
the  London  conference  in  February;  and  in  June,  it  was  the  British 
Labour  Party  which  gave  the  first  hearing  accorded  Kerensky,  fol- 
lowing his  escape  from  Russia. 

The  first  of  the  allied  speakers  was  Emile  Vandervelde,  chair- 
man of  the  old  International  Socialist  Bureau,  a  holder  of  various 
portfolios  in  the  Belgian  ministry  and  an  indefatigable  worker  for 
a  hundred  measures  to  build  up  the  efficiency  and  morale  of  the 
Belgian  army.  He  is  stout,  dignified,  middle-aged,  with  a  close- 
cropped  black  beard  and  a  black  necktie  over  a  white  shirt.  He 
spoke  in  French  with  a  ring  and  modulation  to  his  voice  which 
had  been  lacking  in  the  preceding  speaker;  with  restraint  and  re- 
serve power;  a  man  who  had  argued  in  parliaments  rather  than 
on  street  comers.  His  emotion  was  less  in  the  expression  of  his 
face  than  in  the  tone  of  his  voice,  which  had  a  minor  key  and  rose 
at  one  point  to  an  impassioned  appeal.  How  much  was  understood 
was  problematical,  but  the  spirit  of  the  man  won  repeated  applause. 

His  translator  afforded  a  similar  contrast — short,  stocky,  the 
university  man  in  hale  middle  life.  This  was  Sidney  Webb,  the 
Fabian  historian  of  British  trade  unionism — heavy-moustached,  eye- 
browed  and  bearded,  his  dark  hair  shot  with  gray,  contrasting 
with  full-blooded,  clean-shaven  cheeks.     He  wore  a  black  string 


ANOTHER  ENGLISH  ROUND  TABLE  91 

to  his  eye  glasses  and  would  have  passed  anywhere  for  a  banker. 
Vandervelde  said: 

While  listening  to  the  Russian  representative  I  could  not  help 
but  think  of  the  people  of  northern  France  and  Belgium,  of  Serbia 
and  the  rest.  I  can  understand  the  enthusiasm  for  peace  in  this, 
fourth  winter  of  war  with  privations  and  the  wastage  of  youth. 
From  the  whole  sufifering  mass  of  humanity  goes  up  the  cry  for 
peace.  ["Hear,  hear,"  came  from  the  hall.]  The  whole  world  asks 
for  peace,  but  it  asks — what  peace  ?  Shall  it  be  a  peace  imposed 
upon  us,  or  the  peace  we  want — the  peace  of  democracy?  [Again 
the  cry,  "Hear,  hear."]  Peace  without  conquest  is  not  necessarily 
peace  without  victory.  In  order  to  attain  it  democracy  must  win 
a  double  victory — against  those  who  threaten  us  from  abroad,  and 
against  those  in  our  own  country.  The  internal  victory,  which  the 
Bolsheviki  claim,  was  in  no  small  measure  due  to  those  leaders  of 
the  revolution  who  preceded  them.  With  us,  this  internal  victory  is 
in  no  small  measure  gained,  due  in  the  first  place  to  the  British  prole- 
tariat, at  whose  instance  a  decisive  and  lucid  reply  was  obtained 
from  the  prime  minister  of  the  greatest  empire  of  the  world,  and 
found  an  echo  three  days  later  in  the  message  of  the  president  of 
the  world's  greatest  republic.  This  memorable  result  will  be  defi- 
nitely consolidated  on  that  day  when  the  entente  governments  con- 
firm their  unanimous  desire  in  these  respects  by  means  of  a  col- 
lective declaration. 

It  was  not  enough  for  the  workers  of  the  Allied  nations  to  be 
in  agreement  on  formulas.  They  must  be  unanimous  in  making 
their  program  triumph  by  all  possible  means,  and  this  was  the  great 
task  which  would  be  imposed  upon  the  proletariat  of  democratic 
nations  in  the  near  future.  The  moment  approached  when  in  mu- 
tual agreement  they  must  make  a  solemn  appeal  to  the  proletariat 
on  the  other  side  of  the  trenches,  asking  them  if  they  were  on  the 
side  of  social  democracy  against  their  masters  or  with  their  masters 
against  social  democracy. 

The  future  of  the  International  depended  upon  the  answer  of  the 
German  proletariat  and  on  them  rested  the  possibility  of  common 
action  against  the  autocracies  of  the  mailed  fist.  Liebknecht  had 
stood  for  these  principles.  The  Belgian  people  had  stood  for  them 
— and  would  remain  so  unflinchingly.  With  the  aid  of  the  social 
democracy  of  Germany,  or  without  their  aid,  they  were  resolved 
to  fight  to  the  end  for  the  people's  rights. 

There  followed  the  representatives  of  the  two  wings  of  the 
Socialist  Party  in  France — the  majority  represented  by  its  leader, 
Pierre  Renaudel,  follower  of  Jaures.  Tall,  heavy-set,  he  used  his 
arms  freely,  pounded  the  table,  spoke  with  a  rising  inflection,  every 
phrase  of  which  was  an  appeal,  every  point  swelling  into  a  torrent 


92  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

of  words.    What  he  said  had  also  to  be  translated  by  Sidney  Webb. 
As  he  had  listened  to  the  Russian  delegate,  he  said,  he  at  first 
could  not  help  feeling  a  certain  divergence  of  thought  between 
them.     The  workers  of  all  countries  saw  on  all  hands  ruin  and 
mourning  accumulating,  but  knew  they  could  not  get  out  of  their 
troubles  by  good  will  alone.     It  was  their  will  to  establish  the 
rights  of  the  people,  the  government  of  the  people  by  themselves. 
They  were  still  facing  the  dilemma  of  how.    After  an  entire  month 
the  Russian  delegation  had  been  unable  to  get  a  single  word  out 
of  the  German  negotiators  at  Brest  in  favor  of  the  principles  laid 
down  by  the  Russians.     The  German  armies  had  put  their  hands 
on  Lithuania,  Courland.     The  Russians  said  they  wanted  to  have 
the  whole  people  of  these  provinces  consulted.    The  Germans  said 
no.    And  so  long  as  they  said  no,  the  war  must  go  on.    Like  Van- 
dervelde,  he  could  see  no  other  way  out — the  German  and  Austrian 
people  must  do  their  duty  and  throw  off  militarism.    The  Russian 
revolution  laid  down  principles  which  afforded  a  way  out,  but  they 
must  be  given   effect.     General  rights  must  be  established  on  a 
proper  basis  through  a  league  of  nations  and  through  disarmament. 
The  various  governments  had  come  to  support  the  principles  that 
President  Wilson  had  set  forth.    Thus  the  ideas  had  gone  through- 
out the  governments  and  peoples  of  the  world.     But  upon  the 
working  classes  of  the  world  rested  the  responsibility  to  see  to  it 
that  these  principles  were  given  effect.     He  did  not  want  to  speak 
of  the  ugly  claim  of  the  French  imperialists  for  the  left  bank  of 
the  Rhine;    the  French  Socialists  had  stood  against  it.     But  the 
same  principle  applied  to  Alsace-Lorraine.     The  question  of  the 
provinces  taken  from  France  could  not  be  settled  by  force;  it  was 
not  merely  a  territorial  question,  but  a  question  of  the  reassertion 
of  general  rights.     He  contended  that  the  people  of  Alsace-Lor- 
raine should  give  their  view,  and  that  disannexation  must  precede 
a  plebiscite. 

Differences  there  were,  he  went  on,  but  those  differences  could 
well  be  adjusted  if  submitted  to  the  judgment  of  the  world.  Ger- 
many must  submit  disputed  questions  to  that  judgment.  There 
and  there  only  could  true  internationalism  be  grounded,  on  the  lines 
of  general  rights  and  self-determination  of  the  peoples  concerned. 
This  principle  must  not  be  a  vase  which  could  be  shattered;  it  must 
be  a  living  thing,  and  the  working  classes  must  make  it  so.  When  the 
French  socialists  were  prevented  by  their  government  from  going 
to  Stockholm — if  their  government  had  not  been  blind! — that  is 
the  message  they  would  have  given. 

Renaudel's  address  was  broken  by  a  burst  of  cheers.  It  had 
to  do  with  the  appearance  of  a  well-recognized  and  popular  figure 


ANOTHER  ENGLISH  ROUND  TABLE  93 

— the  belated  representative  of  the  French  minority — Jean  Lon- 
guet — grandson  of  Karl  Marx,  born  in  London  and  educated  there, 
who  has  spent  his  life  in  France.  He  i3  tall,  spare,  a  bit  stooped, 
with  a  long  black  coat  and  a  bush  of  wavy  black  hair  suggestive 
of  the  artist  or  the  musician.  He  spoke  in  fluent  English  and  his 
instant  ability  to  get  into  close  contacts  with  his  listeners,  their 
evident  friendship  of  long  standing,  made  altogether  clear  what  the 
British  workers  were  searching  for  when  they  passed  resolutions 
the  following  day  for  some  simple  international  tongue! 

"This  has  been  a  year  of  great  events,"  he  said,  "and  the  greatest 
of  these  has  been  the  Russian  revolution.  It  has  been  a  year  of 
trial,  but  a  year  which  has  given  to  the  working  class  energy."  To 
continue: 

We  are  told  that  the  Stockholm  meeting  failed.  Yet  when  the 
governments  prevented  the  meeting  from  taking  place,  how  could 
they  say  it  failed?  The  greatest  testimony  of  its  success  is  the  activ- 
ity of  the  working  class  movement  in  all  the  countries.  All  the  so- 
cialist parties  are  unanimous  in  their  demand  for  a  just  and  demo- 
cratic peace.  All  agree  on  the  big  principles  which  the  Russian 
revolution  has  put  forth.  All  are  against  conquest ;  all  against  plun- 
dering; all  against  killing  of  millions  for  it.  The  effect  of  their 
stand  has  been  shown  in  the  recent  statements  of  statesmen  who  are 
now  speaking  the  same  words  that  socialists  were  denounced  for  as 
traitors  a  year  ago.  We  want  peace  and  the  principle  of  self-deter- 
mination for  each  nationality.  And  this  principle  is  one  which  must 
be  applied  by  each  to  his  own  country.  We  believe  that  a  wrong  was 
committed  against  Alsace-Lorraine  forty  years  ago.  But  a  similar 
wrong  would  be  committed  if  against  the  will  of  Alsace-Lorraine  it 
should  now  be  given  over  to  such  or  such  a  country.  We  want 
reparation  for  the  crime  of  forty-five  years  ago.  But  that  repara- 
tion is  a  demand  that  the  people  of  Alsace-Lorraine  shall  say 
what  their  future  shall  be.  [The  French  minority  believed  the 
plebiscite  should  be  under  international  control.]  Never  has  there 
been  so  complete  an  understanding  among  the  working  classes  as 
now.  And  the  belief  in  an  international  union  of  working  classes 
(after  the  war  which  was  supposed  to  break  it  up)  will  be  stronger 
and  deeper  than  ever. 

The  session  was  closed  by  Ramsay  MacDonald.  Slender,  square- 
chinned,  with  a  heavy  black  moustache,  with  tinges  of  gray  in  his 
shock  of  hair— his  was  the  instant  appeal  of  the  natural  orator. 
His  voice  is  deep  and  musical,  with  range  and  variety  of  tone.  His 
language  is  clear,  with  a  lode  of  poetry,  and  his  face  has  changing 
expression  under  emotional  stress. 

He  was  glad  that  the  first  note  of  the  conference  had  been  a 
note  of  fraternity  and  internationalism.    "We  all  want  peace,"  he 


94  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

said.  "We  want  no  patched-up  peace;  we  want  no  truce.  We  have 
never  had  anything  else."  Then  it  was  that  he  gave  as  a  perora- 
tion the  paragraphs  quoted  at  the  outset  of  this  chapter. 

STILL  ANOTHER  ROUND  TABLE 

That  first  evening  meeting  at  Nottingham  brought  into  play 
some  of  the  men  who  counted  for  most  in  the  succeeding  Inter-Allied 
Labour  and  Socialist  conference  in  February,  and  who  to-day  figure 
largely  in  every  international  socialist  gathering.  Quotation  has 
been  made  in  earlier  chapters  of  some  of  the  speeches  at  the  Feb- 
ruary meeting,  but  there  the  committee  work  was  the  important  thing, 
and  the  sessions  were  behind  closed  doors.  The  British  Labour 
Party  conference  in  June  at  which  its  domestic  platform  was  laid 
down,  was  also  the  occasion  for  exchanges  from  fraternal  delegates. 
Troelstra,  the  Dutch  socialist  leader,  who  had  been  in  communica- 
tion with  the  German  socialists,  was  not  permitted  to  come;  but 
Branting  was  there  from  Sweden  and  a  yet  more  sensational  visitor. 

Arthur  Henderson  is  a  clever  stage  manager  and  he  scored  when 
he  suddenly  popped  Kerensky  upon  the  platform.  The  delegates 
were  stunned,  enthusiastic,  and  a  few  of  them  were  puzzled.  The 
words  passed: 

We  don't  want  any  government  plant  about  this. 
What  does  he  represent  as  fraternal  delegate? 
Certain  persons  come  and  go. 

What  lay  in  their  mind  was  this:  If  Margaret  Bondfield  could 
not  go  to  America,  representing  labor,  nor  Troelstra  come  from 
Holland,  why  could  Kerensky  enter  England?  Why  did  the  gov- 
ernment give  permission  to  one  and  not  to  another?  Was  it  that 
Kerensky  v/as  to  be  a  decoy  for  government  policy? 

Kerensky  spoke  for  a  couple  of  minutes  and  his  "real  appear- 
ance" was  postponed  to  the  next  day.  Meanwhile  some  of  the 
delegates  became  "ugly."  "Hear  Litvinoff,"  chanted  a  woman 
socialist.  Neither  regular  business  nor  the  pleading  of  the  chairman 
could  overcome  her  musical  drone.  A  tall,  ascetic,  young,  class- 
conscious  representative  of  the  "left"  kept  precipitating  himself 
from  his  seat,  like  a  jack-in-the-box,  with  a  "Mr.  Chairman,"  "Point 
of  order,  Mr.  Chairman."  Ninety  per  cent  of  the  delegates  were 
growing  annoyed  at  being  held  up  by  the  group  of  obstructors. 

These  are  the  moments  for  which  Henderson  reserves  himself. 
If  one  object  of  oratory  is  to  persuade  and  convince  (just  as  an- 
other is  to  charm  and  inspire  and  stimulate)  then  in  attaining  his 
object  Henderson  is  a  powerful  orator.  He  speaks  without  grace  or 
beauty.     But  he  speaks  to  the  primary  sense  of  justice,  with  a 


ANOTHER  ENGLISH  ROUND  TABLE  g^' 

weight  of  fact  and  reason,  and  directness,  in  a  strong  one-toned 
voice  of  mastery.  In  a  convention  of  many  voices  and  wide  diver- 
gences among  the  extremists,  he  bears  down  and  conquers  opposi- 
tion and  welds  the  welter  into  coherence  and  unity.  Such  a  volume 
of  power  comes  out  of  the  man  as  the  writer  of  these  lines  has 
felt  only  in  two  other  public  men.  (Those  two  men  were  Roosevelt 
and  Moody.)  The  clash  of  opinion  about  breaking  the  government 
truce  had  been  sharp.^  Some  had  believed  it  to  be  a  move  to  lose 
the  war,  a  pro-German  device.  Others  had  wished  to  break  utterly 
with  the  government  and  force  the  labor  members  back  into  private 
life.  Henderson  had  cleared  the  air  with  his  deep,  powerful  voice, 
and  his  middle-of-the-way  interpretation.  And  now  the  convention 
was  in  an  uproar  over  Kerensky.  About  fifty  delegates  were  excited 
and  voluble  because  they  thought  that  Kerensky  was  the  advance 
agent  of  a  Russian  counter-revolution.  Members  of  the  British 
Socialist  Party  saw  in  his  coming  the  beginnings  of  an  attack  on 
the  world's  first  socialist  republic.  They  were  determined  that  he 
should  not  be  heard.  Then  came  Henderson  and  removed  the 
whole  discussion  from  the  realm  of  heated  feelings  and  party  war- 
cries.  He  appealed  to  the  sense  of  fair  play  and  the  right  of  free 
speech.  And  he  reduced  a  shouting  half  hundred  to  five  persons 
against  850  when  the  matter  was  put  to  the  vote. 

Always  the  vote  follows  his  voice.  He  doesn't  intervene  until 
there  is  a  rough-house.  Unlike  some  men  who  compromise  differ- 
ences, he  doesn't  do  it  by  soft  soap  and  gentle  conciliation.  He 
uses  a  cast-iron  voice  and  a  bull  vitality  to  pound  in  the  sensible 
central  interpretation  of  a  plain  man,  and  he  does  it  with  all  the 
energy  and  noise  of  an  exhorter  of  the  extreme  left. 

Henderson  is  one  of  the  most  deceptive  men  we  have  met.  Like 
Ulysses,  when  he  is  seated  you  would  take  him  for  nobody  in  par- 
ticular. In  conversation  he  is  a  little  verbose,  impersonal  and  ora- 
torical. In  a  small  group  he  is  without  saliencj.  But  when  the 
herd  cries  of  a  thousand  strong  men  (representing  two  and  a  half 
million  men)  pierce  through  to  the  layers  of  his  stored  vitality, 
hidden  under  a  commonplace  exterior,  something  awakens  and  he 
puts  on  power  and  rays  it  out  on  the  mass  till  they  obey  him.  He 
is  not  the  initiator  of  general  ideas;  he  adjusts  policy  to  labor  opin- 
ion. But  he  is  honest  and  he  understands  the  leadership  of  men. 
He  has  served  Great  Britain  well.  To  the  conference  Henderson 
said: 

A  prominent  representative  of  the  left  wing  suggested  that  an- 
other prominent  representative  should  be  heard  at  our  previous  con- 

*  See  page  iii. 


96  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

ference  (Litvinoff,  the  representative  of  the  Bolshevik  government). 
In  a  spirit  of  toleration  we  consented.  He  came.  He  made  his 
speech.  We  did  not  agree.  We  listened.  We  listened  as  believers 
in  the  right  of  free  speech. 

The  fight  was  over.  Disorder  died  away.  Kerensky  came  for- 
ward, his  knees  shaking,  but  with  the  orator's  consciousness  of  past 
victories.  He  was  a  sick  man.  He  made  the  impression  of  a  suffer- 
ing, pure-minded  radical,  like  one  of  our  scholarly  East  Side  Jewish 
boys.  He  has  a  face  of  seriousness,  without  humor,  yellow-pale,  a 
well-shaped  head:  the  face  and  head  designed  for  a  larger  body 
than  his  thin,  small  frame.  He  has  the  large  mouth  of  the  natural 
orator,  a  large  but  blunt  nose.  Before  his  talk,  while  he  waited  in 
an  ante-room  for  the  judgment  of  the  delegates,  he  had  walked 
back  and  forth  in  short  nervous  steps,  occasionally  pausing  before 
a  mirror  to  adjust  his  wing  collar  and  puff  necktie.  He  believes  he 
has  come  to  this  planet  on  a  high  mission,  and  he  has  the  face  of 
a  man  who  has  gone  stale  with  overwork  and  suffering;  a  vitality 
that  is  wholly  of  the  spirit,  with  no  physique  to  support  it. 

Once  he  begins  to  speak  he  loses  self -consciousness.  His  red- 
rimmed  small  dark  eyes  light.  His  voice,  harsh  but  with  a  ring, 
stabs  out  the  sentences.  He  speaks  without  effort,  rising  slowly 
to  gesturing  after  ten  minutes  of  less  impassioned  speech.  Between 
sentences  he  pauses,  sometimes  for  several  seconds.  Gradually  and 
naturally  he  fires  himself  into  exaltation  and  ends  in  a  rush  of 
words  which  sweeps  the  audience  to  applause. 

He  spoke  of  the  warning  voices  coming  from  Russia,  when  he 
was  chief,  when  he  begged  the  Allies  to  make  clear  their  war  aims, 
when  they  forced  him  into  an  offensive  that  broke  Russia,  an 
offensive  fought  without  those  war  aims  made  clear: 

It  is  a  thousand  pities  that  the  warning  voices  coming  from 
Russia  were  not  at  that  time  heeded  by  the  Western  Allies. 

The  audience  cheered  loudly. 

I  bear  witness  here  that  the  Russian  people  will  never  recognize 
the  treaty  of  Brest-Litovsk,  which  is  hurling  Russia  into  the  abyss 
of  annihilation. 

He  spoke  of  the  genuine  fanatics  and  the  German  agents  who 
enervated  the  mass  of  Russian  soldiers. 

To  my  astonishment,  some  very  serious  European  political  men 
consider  that  regime  as  democratic  which  dispersed  the  constituent 
assembly,   abolished   freedom  of  speech,  made  human  life  the  easy 


ANOTHER  ENGLISH  ROUND  TABLE  97 

prey  of  every  Red  guardsman,  destroyed  the  liberty  of  the  elections 
even  in  the  councils  of  the  workmen,  and  made  an  end  of  all  the 
institutions  of  self-government  that  have  been  elected  by  universal 
suffrage.  If  this  method  of  dealing  with  the  population  may  be 
considered  democratic,  then  I  shall  be  permitted  to  ask  what  may 
be  the  essence  and  characteristic  features  of  genuine  reaction? 

To  the  conference  he  outlined  Russian  conditions  and  asked 
"whether  it  is  or  is  not  possible  to  remain  a  calm  spectator."  He 
did  not  advocate  a  course  of  action.  There  were  memorable  mo- 
ments with  Kerensky.  One  was  when  the  audience  rose  to  him  and 
sang  "For  he's  a  jolly  good  fellow."  It  is  the  song  with  which  the 
British  greet  a  port  wine  peer  and  a  jolly  tar.  It  needs  ruddy, 
rubicund  faces  and  bottles  and  birds  in  the  shank  of  a  happy  and 
mellow  evening.  Sung  to  this  stricken  man,  lately  out  of  hell,  it 
had  grim  irony. 

The  other  quaint  episode  was  when  Kerensky,  swept  and  up- 
lifted by  the  good  will  of  the  conference,  turned  and  kissed  the 
very  British  stolid  face  of  Arthur  Henderson. 

It  is  to  be  remembered  in  sketching  this  scene  that  the  history 
of  Kerensky  is  woven  in  with  that  of  Henderson.  It  was  the  visit 
to  Russia  of  Henderson  and  his  talks  with  Kerensky  that  sent  him 
home  a  believer  in  an  international  consultative  labor  conference. 
Then  followed  Henderson's  advocacy  of  Stockholm,  his  ejection 
from  the  War  Cabinet  and  his  enhanced  position  in  British  labor. 

In  the  interval  since  the  Nottingham  meeting,  the  crushing  im- 
plications of  the  mailed  fist,  pounded  by  the  German  War  Party  at 
Brest,  had  become  altogether  clear;  its  clenched  blow  at  the  West- 
ern front  had  brought  tragedy  into  uncounted  French  and  Belgian 
and  British  and  German  homes.  Would  the  German  workers  keep 
in  its  grip  or  reach  out  after  the  clasp  of  democratic  fellowship, 
offered  at  the  London  meeting  by  hands  which  held  firmly  the  while 
their  two-edged  blade?  These  things  and  the  course  of  allied  diplo- 
macy were  uppermost  in  the  minds  of  the  fraternal  delegates  who 
spoke. 

First,  came  Pierre  Renaudel,  of  the  French  majority,  who  talked 
at  a  swift  gallop  of  words  in  a  loud  monotone  with  that  note  of 
alarm  which  one  sometimes  marks  in  the  Latin.    He  said: 

We  must  appeal  to  the  revolutionary  elements  in  the  Central  Em- 
pires. When  we  feel  that  movement  coming  toward  us,  then  we 
shall  have  to  see  that  it  receives  freedom  of  expression. 

There  is  still  required  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  memo- 
randum that  elements  in  Germany  should  acknowledge  the  responsi- 
bility for  the  war.     Then  it  is  for  us  to  meet  such  a  movement  on 


98  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

their  part,  and  not  to  allow  the  governments  to  break  such  a  move- 
ment. 

Perhaps  more  surely  than  any  other  speaker  of  the  conference 
Jean  Longuet,  who  follov/ed  him,  struck  the  emotional  receptivity 
of  the  audience.  He  struck  it  several  times.  His  personality  and 
his  words  create  a  little  of  a  spell.  He  is  a  poet  and  mystic  and 
dreamer,  a  dangerous  dreamer  to  the  mind  of  his  opponents.  He 
has  the  blood  of  three  races  in  him,  French  and  German  and  Eng- 
lish, and  so  comes  of  an  international  quality  by  birthright.  Then 
in  his  person  the  long  history  of  the  labor  movement  is  incarnated 
as  in  no  other  leader  in  Europe.    He  said: 

Our  Jingoes  have  played  into  the  hands  of  the  German  Jingoes. 
Your  country  and  mine  are  in  a  worse  condition,  military  and  diplo- 
matic, than  a  year  ago.  Unrest  brought  out  180,000  workingmen  in 
Paris  alone,  demanding  that  war  aims  should  be  published.  In  war 
time  there  exists  no  opportunity  to  have  the  voice  of  the  nation 
heard.  The  battleground  of  militarism  was  once  Czarism  and  is 
now  Germanism.  As  a  French  patriot,  I  protest  against  the_  blind 
never-endism  and  jingoism.  German  militarism  is  the  worst  in  the 
world,  and  I  think  that  the  blind  never-endism  policy  of  sorne  of  our 
leaders  has  helped  the  dangerous  designs  of  German  militarism. 
It  is  because  we,  of  what  has  been  called  the  minority,  are  demand- 
ing the  uprising  of  the  German  people  that  we  demand  an  inter- 
national meeting.  The  German  people  will  not  rise  at  the  appeal  of 
the  capitalistic  governments  of  France  and  England.  But  they  will 
rise  at  the  appeal  of  the  working  class  (loudest  applause  of  the  day). 
This  is  why  we  wish  the  international  meeting. 

As  at  the  inter-Allied  labor  meeting  in  February,  Albert  Thomas 
was  there,  the  French  Socialist  of  the  "right,"  former  minister  of 
munitions.  Despite  canards  to  the  contrary,  he  reaffirmed  his  sub- 
scription to  the  British  labor  procedure.  He  is  heavy  set,  with  a 
ruddy  rectangular  beard.  Full  of  vitality,  he  gestures  with  two 
hands  and  arms,  lifting  them  higher  and  higher  as  if  lifting  a  gift 
to  heaven.    He  said: 

The  military  victory  must  be  supplemented  by  the  power  of  the 
international  labor  movement. 

He  wrote  on  June  28,  during  the  labor  conference: 

By  the  rapid  development  of  her  forces,  the  Entente  must  assume 
the  superior  role.  With  perfect  frankness,  she  must,  at  the  same 
time,  proclaim  ceaselessly  and  define  with  increasing  clearness  the 
conditions  of  a  just  peace  which  she  wishes  to  establish  upon  the 
earth. 


ANOTHER  ENGLISH  ROUND  TABLE  99 

Vandervelde  of  Belgium  came  next,  with  his  authority  of  bear- 
ing and  strong  voice  of  determination: 

In  this  hour  of  supreme  anxiety,  when  the  fate  of  democracy  is 
at  stake,  I  cannot  think  of  Stockholm  or  Berne;  I  think  of  Calais, 
Amiens  and  Paris.  After  the  infamous  Brest-Litovsk  peace,  the 
German  majority  Socialists  have  raised  a  feeble  protest,  but  they 
have  not  even  recorded  their  votes  against  k  in  the  Reichstag. 

The  Socialists  in  occupied  Belgium  send  a  message  of  greeting. 
They  approve  the  attitude  of  their  representatives  at  the  February 
inter-Allied  conference.  We  are  ready  to  take  part  in  an  international 
conference,  provided  that  those  who  stand  on  the  principles  of  inter- 
nationalism shall  be  there.  Those  who  have  betrayed  those  princi- 
ples cannot  be  present.  We  have  sent  our  resolutions  to  the  German 
Socialists.  As  long  as  they  do  not  answer  we  cannot  attend  an  in- 
ternational conference. 

At  the  same  time,  we  know  there  are  those  in  the  enemy  ranks 
who  stand  for  democratic  peace — Kautsky,  Bernstein,  Rosa  Luxem- 
burg, and  other  independent  socialists.  We  must  hope  that  the  fer- 
ment of  revolution  which  exists  in  every  country  will,  if  led  aright, 
help  us.  When  that  day  comes,  we  may  hope  that  the  time  has 
come  for  the  meeting  of  the  International. 

Hjalmar  Branting,  minister  of  state,  leader  of  the  Social  Demo- 
cratic Party  of  Sweden,  was  more  the  typical  statesman  than  any 
other  person  present.  He  was  cautious  and  wise  in  speech,  strongly 
pro-Ally,  anti-German  military,  anti-Bolsheviki,  but  with  tem- 
perateness  in  every  utterance.  He  spoke  as  a  man  whose  words 
carry  influence  and  who,  therefore,  must  be  precise  and  sparing. 
He  has  gray  hair,  brushed  back  from  the  forehead,  bushy  eyebrows, 
a  flowing  moustache,  large,  dim  eyes.  He  is  solidly  built,  a  man 
of  weight,  all  around,  the  experienced  administrator,  the  responsi- 
ble leader,  the  first  citizen  of  Sweden.  He  gave  the  observer  the 
feeling  that  for  long  vision  and  surety  of  action  he  was  the  outstand- 
ing man  upon  the  platform.  He  has  little  appeal  to  an  audience. 
There  is  no  emotional  fire  to  him.  There  is  nothing  histrionic  in 
his  make-up.     It  is  all  solid  worth  and  intelligence. 

Branting's  attitude  was  accurately  given  by  the  Labour  Leader: 

M.  Branting  looked  and,  throughout  his  visit,  spoke  the  part  of 
an  elderly  responsible  progressive  statesman  of  a  neutral  govern- 
ment, terribly  afraid  of  saying  half  a  sentence  that  might  prejudice 
his  power  to  play  a  useful  part  in  bringing  a  people's  peace  out  of 
the  welter  of  the  world  war. 

He  made  it  clear,  said  the  Labour  Leader  (itself  an  organ  of  the 
"left"),  that 


too  THE  WESTERN  FRONT  OF  LABOR 

his  life-long  as  well  as  recent  experiences  of  Prussian  militarism 
had  made  him  on  the  whole  a  majority  rather  than  a  minority 
socialist  among  the  allies.  He  told  us  of  Finland's  recent  sufferings 
and  was  sternly  determined  that  we  should  not  suspect  him  of  either 
Bermondsey  or  Bolsheviki  sympathies,  and  seemed  more  than  per- 
plexed at  ours. 

In  a  talk  with  the  writer,  Branting  said: 

I  have  come  on  the  invitation  of  the  Labour  Party.  I  was  a 
little  uncertain  whether  this  was  the  opportune  time,  because  the 
offensive  was  not  finished,  and  I  believed  the  time  would  be  more 
appropriate  after  the  collapse  of  the  German  offensive,  when  an 
equilibrium  was  established.  The  League  of  Nations,  I  hope,  will 
come,  after  real  peace  and  in  connection  with  it.  It  should  be  a 
council  of  free  nations  who  can  enforce  their  will  on  humanity. 

We  have  had  no  manifestation  from  the  German  Majority  Social- 
ist Party,  One  cannot  say  with  surety  what  is  their  intention.  I 
have  had  no  direct  information  from  them  for  long  months.  In 
certain  things,  there  are  great  differences  between  German  majority 
socialists  and  all  others.  The  German  socialists  should  give  the  same 
guarantee  as  the  allied  socialists. 

In  the  opinion  of  the  Social  Democratic  Party  of  Sweden,  the 
Bolsheviki  are  the  enemies  of  the  socialist  movement.  They  perse- 
cute the  socialists  and  suppress  their  journals.  There  is  a  growing 
feeling  in  Sweden  for  the  allies.  Our  activists  (for  entering  the 
war  on  the  German  side)  are  discredited  by  now.  Among  the  lead- 
ers of  the  Bolsheviks  there  are  pro-Germans. 

To  the  conference,  Branting  said: 

In  Sweden,  the  Socialist  and  Labour  Party  now  have  more  than 
one-third  of  the  seats  in  the  House  of  Commons.  In  the  war,  they 
have   stood    for   neutrality,   anti-military   policy   and   social   reform. 

The  work  of  the  International  has  fallen  on  the  small  countries, 
as  the  link  between  the  belligerents.  It  is  their  duty  to  make  the 
reconstruction  of  the  International  possible. 

We  think  it  possible  to  find  certain  socialists  in  Germany  who 
have  stood  against  imperialism. 

It  is  possible  that  by  the  reconstruction  of  the  International  we 
might  have  avoided  for  the  world  the  great  and  unhappy  events  and 
the  terrible  losses  which  have  occurred  since  last  summer.  Had  our 
comrade,  Troelstra,  been  allowed  to  attend  this  conference  we  should 
have  heard  more  of  the  present  movement  in  the  labor  world  of 
Germany.  A  blunder  which  I  cannot  understand  has  prevented  him 
from  coming  here.     (Voice:    "Lloyd  George.") 

The  Independent  Socialists  of  Germany  are  now  fighting  so 
bravely  that  we  can  hope  that  even  amongst  the  German  majority 
socialists,  where   imperial   currents   are   so   strong,   there   are   other 


ANOTHER  ENGLISH  ROUND  TABLE  loi 

currents  running  in  the  other  direction.  I  hope  amongst  that  major- 
ity there  are  many  who  will  see  they  must  come  over  to  fight  for  a 
just  peace.    The  resurrection  of  the  International  is  certain. 

To  Camille  Huysmans,  M.  Branting  said: 

I  have  the  impression  of  the  American  labor  delegation  that  they 
do  not  well  understand  for  what  reason  we  are  more  concerned  about 
time  than  they  are.  We  must  avoid  the  material  ruin  of  Europe,  and 
for  this  reason  we  fight ;  but  we  have  also  a  peace  policy. 

Summing  up  the  speeches  of  the  fraternal  delegates,  and  the 
sense  of  the  conference: 

They  looked  to  an  international  conference,  but  not  till 

(a)  The  German  democracy  showed  convincing  signs  of  respond- 
ing to  the  inter-Allied  memorandum  and  accepting  its  principles. 

(b)  The  collapse  of  the  German  offensive. 

Because  the  western  offensive  was  at  its  height  and  because  the 
labor  movement  of  Germany  had  not  met  the  proposals  of  Allied 
labor,  the  British  Labour  Party  in  this  June  conference  took  no 
further  steps  in  international  diplomacy.  The  conditions  were  not 
ripe  for  an  international  meeting.  The  time  was  not  now.  But 
British  labor  was,  none  the  less,  slowly  moving  towards  a  con- 
sultative conference.  Its  belief  was  confirmed  that  there  was  no 
way  but  t^  destroy  the  military  power  of  Germany,  the  power  which 
betrayed  Russia  at  Brest-Litovsk.  But  it  believed  that  the  way  to 
destroy  it  was  by  vigorous  prosecution  of  the  war  and  by  the  crea- 
tion of  a  democratic  movement  in  Germany.  J.  H.  Thomas,  secre- 
tary of  the  National  Union  of  Railwaymen  (400,000  members), 
stood,  with  Ben  Tillett,  Will  Thome  and  Will  Crooks,  for  the  vig- 
orous prosecution  of  the  war.  But  he  and  his  railwaymen  were 
committed  to  the  inter-allied  memorandum,  looking  towards  an  in- 
ternational consultative  conference.  On  June  16  he  said  to  the 
railwaymen : 

Our  cause  is  what  it  was  four  years  ago.  It  was  not  territory, 
not  conquest,  but  the  destruction  of  militarism.  For  that  reason  I 
approved  the  Stockholm  conference.  Labor  must  fight  and  must 
insist  upon  meeting  the  workers  of  the  word  face  to  face.  This  is 
the  only  way  of  insuring  an  open  peace. 


In  Part  I,  we  traced  the  origins  of  the  British  labor  offensive 
(in  the  last  six  months  of  191 7) ;  in  Part  II  its  juncture  with  Allied 
labor  and  socialist  groups  (in  the  first  six  months  of  19 18)  in  a 
common  western  front;  we  can  now  turn  to  a  consideration  of 
political  and  industrial  developments  in  Great  Britain  which  paral- 
leled these  movements  in  international  affairs. 


PART  III 
THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE   WORKERS   AT   WESTMINSTER 

The  British  Labour  Party  transformed  itself  during  the  first 
half  of  19 1 8.  A  federation  of  trade  unions,  trade  councils  and 
socialist  societies  it  became  a  national  party  of  workers  "by  hand  or 
by  brain."    Its  many  streams  gathered  into  a  watercourse. 

The  passage  of  the  Representation  of  the  People  Act,  adding 
eight  or  more  million  voters  to  the  electorate,  made  it  necessary  for 
the  political  labor  movement  to  widen  its  course  to  take  in  these  new 
affluents,  or  be  swamped  by  the  very  suffrage  reform  it  had  helped 
bring  into  flood.  Moreover,  labor  was  forewarned  by  its  leaders 
that  the  approach  of  reconstruction  called  for  far-reaching  engineer- 
ing by  the  people  themselves,  if  the  post-bellum  watersheds  of  exist- 
ence were  not  to  be  controlled  by  the  propertied  interests  through 
their  hold  on  the  old  parties.  The  political  movement  gathered 
head  from  the  same  freshets  of  social  unrest  that  we  have  seen 
mounting  higher  and  higher  behind  the  conviction  that  with  respect 
to  the  conduct  of  the  war  itself,  not  in  national  resistance  to  Prus- 
sian aggression  (in  that  labor  was  at  one  with  the  government),  but 
in  a  working-class  diplomacy,  in  the  appeal  to  democratic  elements 
in  Central  Europe  and  in  the  establishment  of  an  unimperialistic 
peace,  the  workers  needed  a  free  channel  for  expression  distinct  from 
the  Foreign  Office  or  the  War  Cabinet. 

So,  in  six  months'  time  came  the  reorganization  of  the  British 
Labour  Party,  the  breaking  of  the  truce  with  the  government  and 
the  formulation  of  its  radical  domestic  platform.  The  first  and 
second  of  these  developments  will  be  taken  up  in  this  chapter;  the 
third  in  the  chapter  succeeding. 

By  the  new  constitution  adopted  at  a  special  conference  in  late 
February,^  provision  was  made  for  the  first  time  for  individual  mem- 
bership in  the  party,  and  special  facilities  were  given  to  women 
electors  to  join.  A  local  labor  party  was  called  for  in  each  Parlia- 
mentary constituency,  with  separate  sections  for  men  and  women. 
Hitherto,  there  had  been  less  than  100  such  locals.  The  National 
Executive  was  enlarged  from  16  members  to  22,  13  to  be  chosen 

*  Appendix  IIL 

10s 


io6         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

from  the  trade  unions  and  other  societies,  five  from  the  local  organ- 
izations, and  four  from  women.  The  "objects"  of  the  party  (hith- 
erto defined  simply  as  "to  organize  and  maintain  in  Parliament  and 
the  country  a  political  labor  party")  were  expanded  to  include  the 
promotion  of  the  interests  of  all  producers  without  distinction  of 
class  or  occupation.  These  objects  were  set  out  under  three  head- 
ings— "National,"  "Inter-Dominion"  and  "International": 

NATIONAL 

(a)  To  organize  and  maintain  in  Parliament  and  in  the  country 
a  political  labor  party,  and  to  insure  the  establishment  of  a  local 
labor  party  in  every  county  constituency  and  every  parliamentary 
borough,  with  suitable  divisional  organization  in  the  separate  con- 
stituencies of  divided  boroughs. 

(b)  To  cooperate  with  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the 
Trades  Union  Congress,  or  other  kindred  organizations,  in  joint 
political  or  other  action  in  harmony  with  the  party  constitution  and 
standing  orders. 

(c)  To  give  effect  as  far  as  may  be  practicable  to  the  principles 
from  time  to  time  approved  by  the  party  conference. 

(d)  To  secure  for  the  producers  by  hand  or  by  brain  the  full 
fruits  of  their  industry,  and  the  most  equitable  distribution  thereof 
that  may  be  possible,  upon  the  basis  of  the  common  ownership  of 
the  means  of  production  and  the  best  obtainable  system  of  popular 
administration  and  control  of  each  industry  or  service. 

(e)  Generally  to  promote  the  political,  social  and  economic 
emancipation  of  the  people,  and  more  particularly  of  those  who 
depend  directly  upon  their  own  exertions  by  hand  or  by  brain  for 
the  means  of  life. 

INTER-DOMINION 

(f)  To  cooperate  with  the  labor  organizations  in  the  dominions 
and  dependencies  with  a  view  to  promoting  the  purposes  of  the  party 
and  to  take  common  action  for  the  promotion  of  a  higher  standard 
of  social  and  economic  life  for  the  working  population  of  the  re- 
spective countries. 

INTERNATIONAL 

(g)  To  cooperate  with  the  labor  organizations  in  other  countries, 
and  to  assist  in  organizing  a  federation  of  nations  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  freedom  and  peace,  and  for  the  establishment  of  suitable 
machinery  for  the  adjustment  and  settlement  of  international  dis- 
putes by  conciliation  or  judicial  arbitration,  and  for  such  interna- 
tional legislation  as  may  be  practicable. 


THE  WORKERS  AT  WESTMINSTER 


107 


Further  points  as  to  the  make-up  and  development  of  the  polit- 
ical labor  movement  in  Great  Britain  will  show  the  significance  of 

this  change.    The  following  table  gives  the  fluctuations  in  the  party 
membership  since  its  formation  in  1900: 

Trades  Councils  and 

Trade  Unions.                       Local  Labor  Parties.  Socialist  Societies. 

No.          Membership.                        No.                    No.  Membership.         Total. 

igoo-l      41                 353.070                                  7                        3  22,861  375.9.^1 

1901-2     6s               4SS.4SO                            ai                      a  13,861  469.311 

1902-3     127               847,31s                             49                     2  13.83s  861,150 

1903-4     16s                 956,025                                76                        *  13,775  969,800 

1904-S     158               855,270                            73                     a  14,730  900,000 

1905-6     158               904,496                             73                     3  16,784  921,280 

1906-7     176                975, 18a                                83                        i  20,885  998,338 

1907          181              1,049,673                                92                        3  22,267  1,072,413 

1908          176             l,i27,03r                              133                        2  27.465  1,158,565 

igog        172            1,450,648                           iSS                      a  30,982  1,486,308 

1910        151            1,394,402                           148                     a  31.377  1,430,539 

1911         141             i,5or,783                             149                       a  31,404  1,539.092 

191a         130            1,858,178                           146                     a  31,237  1,895,498 

1913        t                     t                                 158                     2  33,304  t 

1914        loi            1.572.391                          179                    a  33,230  1,612,147 

1915        Ill            a>oS3.73S                           177                      «  32,838  2,093,36s 

1916        119            a, 170,78a                           199                     3  42,190  2,219,764 

1917         123             «>4iS,383                            339                       3  47,140  2,465,131 

t  Owing  to  the  operatioa  of  the  Osborne  Judgment  it  was  impossible  to  compile  membership  sta' 
tistics  for  1913. 


At  the  close  of  191 7,  the  British  Labour  Party  was,  thus,  a 
federation  of  123  trade  unions,  146  trade  councils  (which  are  com- 
posed of  trade  union  branches),  and  93  local  labor  parties,  together 
with  3  socialist  societies,  a  women's  labor  league,  and  one  cooper- 
ative society.  These  bodies  overlapped  in  a  variety  of  ways;  but  of 
the  aggregate  membership  of  2,465,131,  2,415,383  were  affiliated 
through  distinctly  labor  bodies.  Of  the  remainder,  10,000  were 
affiliated  through  the  British  Socialist  Party,  35,000  through  the 
Independent  Labour  Party,  2,140  through  the  Fabian  Society.  The 
Tunbridge  Wells  Cooperative  Society  brought  in  2,600,  the  Women's 
Labour  League  5,500.  It  will  be  seen  that  there  were  less  than 
50,000  "party  socialists"  among  two  and  a  half  million  trade  union- 
ists. That  is,  98  per  cent  of  the  British  Labour  Party  was  trade 
unionist;  2  per  cent  "party  socialist"  and  even  of  that  2  per  cent, 
a  large  fraction  was  trade  unionist.  We  are  thus  dealing,  in  con- 
trast to  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  with  a  political  labor 
movement;  but  in  contrast  to  the  political  labor  movements  on  the 
European  continent,  with  a  trade  union,  rather  than  an  old-line 
socialist  body. 

This  make-up  has  been  reflected  in  both  party  control  and 
finances.  No  trade  council  or  local  labor  party  contributed  over 
£2  a  year  to  the  treasury;  the  socialist  groups  together  paid  less 
than  £200,  or  less  than  each  of  such  trade  union  bodies  as  the 
Amalgamated  Association  of  Card  and  Blowing  Room  Operatives 


io8         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

(54,967  members),  the  National  Union  of  Boot  and  Shoe  operatives 
(51,035  members),  the  Postmen's  Federation  (54,414  members). 
The  general  unions  of  unskilled  and  semi-skilled  labor  ranged  from 
the  28,985  of  the  Dock  Labourers  and  the  47,881  of  the  Dock, 
Wharf,  Riverside  and  General  Workers'  Union,  to  the  82,117  of  the 
National  Amalgamated  Union  of  Labour,  the  168,000  of  the  Work- 
ers' Union  and  the  188,774  of  the  National  Union  of  General  Work- 
ers. And  outstripping  them  came  the  great  trade  groups — the  Amal- 
gamated Society  of  Engineers  with  160,000  members,  the  National 
Union  of  Railwaymen  with  130,368  members,^  the  Textile  Factory 
Workers'  Association  with  193,788  (paying  £807),  and  the  Miners' 
Federation  with  600,000  members  and  contributing  £2,500  to  the 
common  purse. 

These  national  unions  have  functioned  also  in  the  party  repre- 
sentation in  Parliament,  putting  up  the  necessary  financial  guar- 
antees for  election  expenses.  Thus,  a  list  of  37  constituencies  and 
candidates,  published  at  Nottingham,  began  with — 

Ayrshire,    South — James    Brown,    56    Annabank-by-Ayr,    Scotland 
(Miners'  Federation  of  Great  Britain), 

and  closed  with 

Wolverhampton,  West— A.  G.  Walkden,  337  Gray's  Inn  Road,  Lon- 
don, W.  C.  (Railway  Clerks'  Association). 

The  Miners  sponsored  12  out  of  the  37,  or  more  than  the  10 
of  the  Independent  Labour  Party.  Out  of  a  supplemental  list  of 
81  candidates  who  had  received  official  endorsement  of  the  party 
executive  and  offered  themselves  for  selection  by  constituencies,  20 
had  been  put  forward  by  national  labor  unions  which  undertook 
to  finance  their  candidatures  if  the  districts  nominating  them  met 
with  their  approval. 

The  approach  of  the  party  executive  to  the  problem  of  reorgan- 
ization was  set  forth  in  submitting  the  agenda  for  discussion  at  the 
February  conference.    It  said: 

The  strain  imposed  by  the  war  has  not  only  broken  down  the 
competitive  industrial  system  and  has  led  to  national  organization 
to  a  degree  that  appeared  practically  impossible  in  the  days  of  peace. 
It  has  also  been  possible  to  withdraw  over  five  million  men  from 
national  production,  and  yet  at  the  same  time  to  increase  our  pro- 
ductivity to  an  enormous  extent.    These  and  many  similar  facts  have 

*  These  figures  refer  to  the  membership  affiliated  to  the  British  Labour 
Party;  not  to  the  total  membership  of  the  organizations. 


THE  WORKERS  AT  WESTMINSTER  109 

led  the  more  thoughtful  of  the  community  to  consider  proposals  for 
national  reorganization  on  lines  which  were  popular  only  in  labor 
circles  before  the  war.  Further,  the  participation  of  the  British 
labor  movement  in  international  affairs  and  its  attempt  to  institute  a 
genuine  working  class  diplomacy,  has  brought  prestige  to  the  party 
in  a  manner  that  can  hardly  be  realized  without  a  full  knowledge  of 
the  facts. 

Labor  policy  on  the  national  food  supply  has  also  been  consis- 
tently ahead  of  that  propounded  by  other  political  sections  and  has 
had  to  be  invariably  adopted  after  suffering  months  of  hostility  or 
indifference.  Moreover,  it  is  remembered  that  the  party  from  the 
early  days  of  the  war  has  stood  consistently  for  a  decent  system  of 
separate  allowances  and  pensions  for  the  men  with  the  colors,  and 
their  dependants,  and  while  the  original  "£i  per  week  campaign"  did 
not  altogether  achieve  its  purpose,  constant  labor  pressure,  particu- 
larly on  the  part  of  local  labor  organizations  throughout  the  country, 
made  its  influence  felt  in  the  right  direction. 

All  these  circumstances  have  been  the  occasion  for  the  develop- 
ment of  a  certain  amount  of  community  consciousness,  and  the  party 
has  been  definitely  accepted  by  ever-increasing  numbers  of  the  public 
as  its  concrete  expression. 

When  the  executive  committee,  therefore,  at  the  suggestion  of 
the  secretary,  considered  the  possible  developments  of  the  party  in 
the  future,  there  was  general  unanimity  as  to  the  lines  that  should 
be  adopted.  It  was  felt  very  strongly  that  our  machinery  should  be 
adapted  so  as  to  bring  into  the  ranks  of  the  party  those  large  sections 
of  the  public,  who,  for  various  reasons,  have  neither  the  necessity 
nor  opportunity  of  joining  trade  unions  on  the  one  hand,  or,  on  the 
other,  who  are  not  prepared  to  associate  with  the  socialist  organiza- 
tions already  affiliated  with  the  party. 

The  difficulty  lay  in  reconciling  this  policy  of  expansion  with  one 
which,  at  the  outset  of  a  costly  campaign,  would  not  scrap  the  back- 
ing in  money  and  interest  of  the  constituent  labor  bodies.  On  one 
hand,  there  was  rebellion  at  the  block  system  of  voting,  by  which 
a  few  great  unions  could  control  things,  and  on  the  other,  fear- 
someness  lest,  in  throwing  open  the  doors  to  outsiders,  labor  would 
lose  the  political  instrument  it  had  so  slowly  built  up.  The  outcome 
was  a  compromise.    As  Henderson  put  it: 

In  drafting  the  new  constitution,  the  executive  had  regard  to  the 
necessity  of  achieving  unity.  Under  the  new  scheme  we  have  sought 
to  distribute  power  and  responsibility  between  the  national  unions 
and  the  local  organizations,  and  between  the  official  element  and 
the  individual  member.  One  important  feature  of  the  constitution 
is  that  it  makes  the  local  groups  the  unit  of  organization  rather 
than  the  national  societies,  and  thus  establishes  a  more  direct  rela- 
tionship with  the  individual  electors  in  every  constituency. 


110        THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

THE  RISE  OF  POLITICAL  ACTION 

By  SO  much  has  trade  unionism  entered  upon  a  new  stage  in  its 
organized  development  in  England.  Labor,  unadulterated  by  mid- 
dle-class persons,  had  first  to  make  its  fight  as  a  body  of  wage- 
earners  for  the  right  of  collective  bargaining.  This  is  the  long  fight 
of  wage-earners  alone — manual  workers,  craftsmen.  Gradually, 
British  labor  found  that  it  had  to  spend  itself  in  agitation  and 
indirect  pressure  in  order  to  protect  itself  against  hostile  acts  and 
to  secure  labor  legislation.  Lacking  a  political  party,  it  lacked 
direct  representation.  It  sought  it,  and  trade  unionism  entered 
upon  a  second  stage. 

In  the  final  years  of  the  last  century,  Liberal-Labour  members 
slid  into  Parliament  between  the  stratified  layers  of  the  old  parties. 
In  1899,  the  Trades  Union  Congress  established  a  political  labor 
organization  by  creating  the  Labour  Representation  Committee.  Out 
of  this,  through  the  years  of  this  century,  has  grown  the  British 
Labour  Party.  The  Labour  Party  was  strengthened  by  the  Taff 
Vale  case  when  in  1902  the  Taff  Vale  Railway  Company  obtained 
damages  from  a  railway  union  because  of  a  strike  involving  breach 
of  contract.  The  return  of  29  labor  members  to  Parliament  in  1906 
was  the  answer  to  this  attempt  to  cripple  the  industrial  movement. 
Labor  learned  that  when  it  is  attacked  on  the  industrial  field,  one 
of  the  swiftest  redresses  is  by  political  demonstration.  In  the  same 
year,  1906,  labor  obtained  the  Trade  Disputes  Act,  freeing  the  trade 
unions  from  such  actions  as  that  of  the  Taff  Vale  Railway  Company, 
Naturally  enough^  British  labor  came  to  believe  that  direct  political 
power  (that  is,  representation  in  Parliament)  is  right  and  neces- 
sary to  protect  the  labor  movement  from  industrial  crushing. 

This  belief  did  not  go  unchallenged.  In  1909,  a  trade  unionist 
by  the  name  of  Osborne  claimed  that  the  expenditure  of  the  funds 
of  his  railway  union  for  political  purposes  was  illegal.  The  House 
of  Lords  decided  in  his  favor  against  the  union.  Labor  replied  to 
this  and  other  challenges  by  electing  42  members  in  December, 
1 9 10,  to  the  House  of  Commons;  in  19 13,  it  obtained  a  Trade 
Union  Act,  which  in  part  set  aside  the  Osborne  judgment.  Again, 
labor  found  that  political  action  alters  industrial  status. 

As  C.  T.  Cramp,  president  of  the  National  Union  of  Railwa5mien, 
said  on  June  17,  1918: 

The  position  (of  labor)  cannot  be  met  by  industrial  action  alone. 
The  incidence  of  taxation  and  many  other  problems  must  be  fought 
out  in  Parliament. 

The  war  brought  in  the  third  stage  more  swiftly  than  it  would 
otherwise  have  come — that  in  which  the  workers  generally  recognize 


THE  WORKERS  AT  WESTMINSTER  iii 

that  to  make  the  world  safe  for  such  part  of  democracy  as  they  may 
be,  they  must  concern  themselves  with  more  than  hours  and  wages 
in  the  shop,  and  more  than  labor  legislation  in  Parliament.  They 
must  concern  themselves  with  the  whole  scheme  of  social  condi- 
tions and  relations  in  which  these  things  are  imbedded,  and  which 
affect  unnumbered  other  people  in  much  the  same  way.  The  shoe- 
maker's children  are  not  the  only  ones  without  shoes.  The  war 
experience  that  drove  this  realization  home,  opened  up  the  vista 
of  making  common  cause  with  those  unnumbered  others  to  whom, 
being  organized,  labor  could  offer  not  only  proposals  for  democratic 
change  but  also  a  practical  political  fellowship. 

The  party's  re-birth  registered  the  fact  that  labor  had  slowly 
worked  out  a  policy  distinct  from  that  of  the  governing  classes. 
It  saw  the  necessity  of  sharing  in  the  control  of  state  policy  and  of 
sharing  that  control  with  those  who  felt  as  it  did.  The  danger  to 
the  AlUed  cause,  as  the  labor  leaders  saw  it,  had  been  in  stripping 
the  war  of  its  moral  values.  They  did  not  wish  that  Lord  Milner, 
Lord  Curzon  and  Mr.  Balfour  should  have  the  sole  statement  of 
war  aims.  Likewise,  they  saw  that  the  common  people  of  all  Eng- 
land could  not  leave  the  care  of  disabled  soldiers  and  sailors,  the 
control  of  mines  and  railways,  the  release  of  the  land,  the  restora- 
tion or  substitution  of  trade  union  regulations,  taxation,  to  Lord 
Milner,  Lord  Curzon  and  Mr.  Balfour,  alone.  They  desired  a  dif- 
ferent kind  of  reconstruction  out  of  the  wreck  of  the  war. 

So  labor  hitched  its  wagon  to  a  star  and  set  off  as  a  common 
carrier  down  the  war-sobered  high  roads  of  old  England.  As  Arthur 
Henderson  put  it: — Labor  could  no  longer  be  "merely  a  critical 
voice  in  Parliament  and  an  active  revolutionary  ferment  in  the 
country";  it  would  "at  no  distant  date  be  required  to  accept  re- 
sponsibility for  the  carrying  out  of  the  policy  it  advocates." 

THE  BREAKING  OF  THE  TRUCE 

Military  developments  and  the  continued  postponement  of  a 
general  election  made  the  Labour  Party  move  slowly  in  19 18,  fol- 
lowing the  February  conference  at  which  it  adopted  its  new 
constitution.  With  the  German  drive  against  Amiens,  it  shelved  a 
scheme  of  propaganda  meetings  throughout  the  spring  in  the  in- 
dustrial cities.  (This  was  mistakenly  interpreted  in  the  American 
press  as  a  decision  to  abandon  its  whole  war  aims  and  inter-bellig- 
erent conference  procedure.) 

At  its  June  conference,  it  "broke  the  truce"  but  did  so  in  a 
way  which  upset  the  feelings  both  of  the  extreme  left  and  of  the 
government  labor  group  of  the  extreme  right.    It  carried  the  mod- 


112         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

erate  left  by  taking  a  step  in  the  direction  they  wanted  to  go,  and 
the  moderate  right  by  stopping  short  of  a  decision  that  meant  that 
labor  members  must  leave  the  government.  It  severed  labor  policy 
from  government  policy  in  the  practical  politics  of  current  elections 
while  guarding  against  a  move  which  could  be  interpreted  as  out 
of  sympathy  with  the  rigorous  support  of  the  Allied  troops  in  throw- 
ing back  the  swollen  German  armies  from  France,  now  as  at  no 
time  since  the  earlier  years  of  the  war,  threatening  Paris  and  the 
channel  ports. 

Elihu  Root  (July,  1918)  phrased  with  exactness  the  attitude  of 
the  British  Labour  Party  to  the  coalition  government.  His  analysis 
concerned  itself  with  our  own  government,  but  the  claim  he  made 
for  the  Republican  Party  was  the  claim  made  by  the  British  Labour 
Party.    He  said: 

We  have  been  building  up  by  a  great  mass  of  statutes  an  execu- 
tive authority  unprecedented  in  scope  and  absolutism.  No  govern- 
ment can  afiford  to  go  on  without  the  tests  and  criticisms  of  policy 
and  performance  which  can  hardly  be  furnished  during  the  con- 
tinuance of  this  war  except  by  putting  Republicans  in  Congress. 
[Labor  men  in  Parliament.]  With  the  tremendous  power  which  the 
exigencies  of  war  have  vested  in  the  executive  branch  of  govern- 
ment, it  is  very  difficult  for  legislative  members  of  the  party  in  power 
to  express,  or  indeed  to  form,  independent  judgment  and  to  subject 
measures  proposed  for  legislation  to  the  process  of  correction  and 
improvement  by  discussion  and  amendment;  yet  without  this,  terrible 
mistakes  are  certain  to  be  made. 

[In  the  matter  of  policy,  of  course,  the  analogy  would  be  closer 
if  we  should  imagine  Root  in  the  White  House  and  Wilson  stating 
the  case  for  the  more  radical  party  out  of  power.] 

At  the  Nottingham  conference  in  January,  the  question  of  the 
continuance  of  the  labor  members  in  the  coalition  government  was 
already  actively  agitated.  The  action  of  the  executive  in  support- 
ing the  candidature  of  G.  H.  Roberts  at  the  recent  bye-election  at 
Norwich,  following  his  appointment  as  minister  of  labor  and  in 
the  face  of  opposition  from  the  local  Trades  and  Labour  Council, 
was  sharply  protested  in  resolutions  offered  by  the  Huddersfield  and 
District  Associated  Trades  and  Labour  Council  and  from  the  similar 
body  at  Great  Yarmouth.  Resolutions  for  the  withdrawal  of  the 
labor  members  from  the  coalition  government  were  offered  by  the 
Manchester  and  Salford  Labour  Party;  by  the  Lambeth  Trades 
Council  and  Labour  Representation  Committee  (which  urged  it  "in 
order  to  regain  for  labor  the  freedom  of  complete  independence, 
when  dealing  with  the  great  economic,  industrial  and  social  prob- 


THE  WORKERS  AT  WESTMINSTER  113 

lems  which  must  inevitably  be  dealt  with  in  the  near  future") ;  by 
the  British  iSocialist  Party  (which  held  that  "the  methods  employed 
to  remove  Mr.  Henderson  from  the  War  Cabinet  when  acting  in 
perfect  accord  with  the  decisions  of  the  Labour  Party,  prove  that 
participation  in  the  government  and  fidelity  to  the  labor  movement 
are  incompatible");  by  the  Willesden  I>abour  Party;  by  the  Shef- 
field Trades  and  Labour  Council  (which  maintained  that  "the 
chief  political  function  of  the  working  class  is  the  destruction  of 
the  existing  capitalist  order") ;  by  the  East  Ham  Trades  and  Labour 
Council  ("in  view  of  the  continued  bare-faced  robbery  of  the  peo- 
ple by  the  food  pirates  and  the  open  support  given  by  the  govern- 
ment to  this  action  in  steadfastly  refusing  to  suppress  the  robbers 
and  to  administer  the  whole  food  supply  of  the  nation  in  the  inter- 
ests of  the  people") ;  by  the  Edinburgh  Labour  Party,  the  Scientific 
Instrument  Makers'  Trade  Society,  and  the  Glasgow  Trades  Council. 
As  noted  on  page  45,  under  Henderson's  personal  leadership,  the 
resolutions  were  voted  down,  on  the  ground  that  withdrawal  might 
embarrass  the  government  in  the  prosecution  of  the  war.  Six  months 
later,  at  the  June  Conference,  the  party  executive  itself  came  for- 
ward with  this  resolution: 

That  this  conference  of  the  Labour  Party  accepts  the  recom- 
mendation of  the  party  executive  that  the  existence  of  the  political 
truce  should  be  no  longer  recognized. 

In  presenting  the  resolution,  Henderson  recalled  the  facts  that 
soon  after  the  outbreak  of  war  a  political  truce  was  entered  into 
by  representatives  of  the  Liberal  Party,  the  Conservative  Party,  and 
the  Labour  Party,  wherein  it  was  agreed  that  in  the  event  of  any 
parliamentary  vacancies  occurring  there  should  be  no  contested 
elections.  The  truce  held  good  with  renewals  until  December  31, 
1916,  when,  he  said,  the  other  parties  sought  to  import  conditions 
into  the  agreement  which  the  Labour  Party  executive  were  not  pre- 
pared to  accept.  Since  the  end  of  19 16,  there  had  been  no  written 
compact.  But  in  the  intervening  period,  the  executive  felt  that  the 
circumstances  of  the  times  were  such  that  it  was  altogether  desir- 
able that  the  spirit  of  the  truce  should  be  observed.  Nevertheless, 
on  several  occasions  the  affiliated  labor  organizations,  in  constituen- 
cies where  vacancies  occurred,  had  accepted  the  executives'  view 
with  the  greatest  reluctance.  In  the  Keighley  and  Wansbeck  divi- 
sions, the  local  organizations  contested  the  vacancies  against  the  ex- 
ecutive's recommendation.  In  Keighley,  the  candidate,  on  a  peace- 
by-negotiation  war  platform,  polled  two  thousand  out  of  six  thou- 
sand votes.  In  Wansbeck,  the  miner  candidate,  on  the  same  plat- 
form, polled  five  thousand  out  of  approximately  eleven  thousand 


114         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

votes,  and  came  within  547  votes  of  winning.  By  June,  therefore, 
the  executive  had  decided  that  the  conference  should  be  invited  to 
vote  on  the  issue  of  breaking  the  truce  with  the  government.  Hen- 
derson said: 

I  hold  very  strong  views  about  the  government  and  the  war,  and 
that  is  why  I  have  declined,  during  the  last  twelve  months,  to  take 
any  action  that  would  place  this  government  out  of  office  and  put  in 
a  government  whose  policy  I  know  nothing  about.  The  last  thing 
the  Labour  Party  ought  to  do,  having  regard  to  its  small  member- 
ship in  the  House,  is  to  make  itself  responsible  for  putting  one 
government  out  without  knowing  what  the  next  would  be.  If  your 
executive  had  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  time  had  arrived  when 
we  ought  to  withdraw  the  whole  of  our  members  from  the  coalition, 
they  would  have  faced  the  conference  boldly  with  a  recommendation 
to  that  effect. 

We  believe  it  was  much  better  that  bye-elections  should  not  be 
contested.  That  was  observed  until  the  Salford  election.  Ben  Tillett 
was  one  of  our  listed  candidates,  and  he  went  there,  and  fought  and 
won.  He,  a  supporter  of  the  war,  broke  the  truce  and  won. 
Can  you  wonder  if  somebody  thinks  they  can  repeat  Tillett? 
That  is  the  issue  we  had  to  face,  and  were  compelled  to  face,  because 
Salford  was  followed  by  Keighley,  and  Keighley  by  Wansbeck. 

The  press  created  a  crisis  which  is  blown  to  the  winds.  We  are 
asked  to  vote  on  one  aspect  only — the  truce  as  regards  bye-elections. 
The  phrase  could  have  been  included.  The  resolution  can  have  no 
other  meaning.  It  is  not  intended  to  cover  all  relationships.  Those 
who  link  up  the  truce  and  the  coalition  government  do  so  for  pur- 
poses of  mischief.  Not  till  after  the  Wansbeck  election  did  we  make 
our  decision.  We've  either  got  to  have  a  truce  and  everybody  keep 
it,  or  else  rid  the  executive  of  responsibility.  You've  got  to  accept 
the  truce  if  you  reject  the  recommendation.  The  executive  will  lose 
little  sleep  whichever  way  you  decide. 

If  the  executive  had  wished  the  withdrawal  of  our  representa- 
tives from  the  government,  it  would  have  come  out  and  said  so.  In 
a  war,  one  of  the  dangers  is  to  change  the  government  too  easily. 
For  myself,  I  shall  not  be  party  to  any  government  that  is  not 
under  the  control  of  labor.  But  there  is  no  connection  between  ap- 
proving the  candidacy  of  the  miners'  representative,  and  breaking  the 
government.  This,  then,  is  the  only  issue:  to  have  a  truce  and 
everybody  keep  it,  or  no  truce. 

i 

Then  followed  a  speech  by  Robert  Smillie  against  Henderson's 
conservative  course.  Smillie  wanted  to  break  the  truce  and  he 
wanted,  also,  the  labor  members  out.  In  his  voice  there  is  that 
which  makes  you  remember  the  multitude  whom  he  represents.  He 
is  a  man  of  middle  life,  with  a  face  of  sensitiveness — a  face  that  is 
sad  in  repose  and  into  which  consciousness  of  power  passes  when 


THE  WORKERS  AT  WESTMINSTER  115 

he  speaks.  His  eyes  carry  a  far-seeing  look.  He  is  a  man  of  the 
common  people  who  has  seen  and  felt  suffering.  He  hates  that 
men  should  needlessly  suffer  as  he  hates  nothing  else,  and  this 
makes  him  the  militant  pacifist  that  he  is.  In  supporting  the  Brit- 
ish war  aims  memorandum  at  the  joint  December  (1917)  meeting, 
he  had  said:  "Peace  now  would  be  a  victory  for  humanity,  and 
peace  two  years  hence,  whoever  the  victor,  would  be  a  defeat  for 
humanity."    To  this  June  (1918)  conference,  Smillie  said: 

At  Wansbeck,  we  wanted  a  miner.  The  miners  are  not  an  unim- 
portant part  of  this  conference.  With  the  assistance  of  the  Labour 
Party,  we  could  have  won  the  election.  We  were  told  that  there  was 
a  truce.  As  it  was,  without  the  help  of  the  Labour  Party,  the  elec- 
tion gave  an  indication  of  the  temper  of  this  country  from  end  to 
end.  After  the  truce  was  entered  into,  it  was  reported  to  the  rank 
and  file.  And  now,  this  morning,  we  were  amazed  to  hear  from 
Mr.  Henderson  that  there  has  been  no  truce  since  1916.  And  he 
suggests  one  or  two  words,  "as  regards  bye-elections,"  which  will 
change  the  whole  sense  of  it.  Mr.  Henderson  has  had  a  hand  in 
changing  governments  during  this  war.  Blindfolded  in  this  hall,  he 
could  make  sure  of  a  better  government  than  the  present — a  govern- 
ment that  has  refused  to  allow  you  to  entertain  an  honored  guest, 
Troelstra,  the  Dutch  delegate,  that  has  refused  to  allow  us  to  choose 
our  company,  a  government  who  prevented  Maggie  Bondfield  from 
going  to  America.^ 

And  we  are  going  to  end  the  truce,  Mr.  Henderson. 

We  are  not  as  strong  as  we  should  be  if  our  labor  men  were 
outside  the  government.  We  should  have  won  our  Wansbeck  elec- 
tion with  the  assistance  of  the  Labour  Party.  I  sincerely  hope  this 
conference  will  end  our  connection  with  the  coalition  government. 
There  is  no  dignity  left  to  the  labor  movement  if  the  government 
refuses  our  invited  guests  and  refuses  to  let  Maggie  Bondfield  go, 
because  she  does  not  think  as  the  government  thinks.  So  now  we 
are  to  end  a  truce  that  doesn't  exist,  and  we  want  no  new  truces 
behind  our  backs. 

J.  Bromley,  secretary  of  the  Locomotive  Engineers  and  Fire- 
men (34,000  members),  backed  up  Smillie  and  said: 

The  opinion  of  the  rank  and  file  is  to  break  the  truce. 

J.  Jones,  a  delegate  of  the  General  Workers  (164,000  members), 
represented  the  socialist  right.    He  said: 

It's  not  unity  some  people  want  but  scalps.  Bad  as  this  country 
is,  it's  the  best  I  know  of.     Pm  not  going  to  change  Lloyd  George 

*  Miss  Margaret  Bondfield  was  selected  to  go  to  the  St.  Paul  meeting 
of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  as  one  of  the  two  fraternal  delegates 
representing  the  Trades  Union  Congress.    Her  going  was  frustrated. 


ii6         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

for  Lansdowne.  We  want  to  escape  the  pitfalls  our  comrades  in 
other  countries  have  met.  Lord  Curzon  is  more  hateful  than  a 
Prussian  Junker.  Carson  to  me  is  first  cousin  to  Judas  Iscariot. 
But  in  spite  of  the  bad  company  we  have  to  keep,  we'll  go  on  with 
the  government.  We  have  gained  the  recognition  from  the  govern- 
ment, that  from  the  ranks  of  organized  labor  men  can  be  found 
who  can  handle  the  situation.  I'm  a  pro-war  socialist  and  a  pro- 
Ally  socialist. 

Robert  Williams  is  secretary  of  the  Federation  of  Transport 
Workers  (350,000  members)  and  a  leader  of  the  radical  element. 
He  said  he  expected  to  see  Clynes  (who  was  then  parliamentary 
secretary  to  the  food  controller)  come  forward  in  defense  of  the 
position  of  himself  and  the  other  labor  members  of  the  government: 

I  look  on  Mr.  Clynes  as  a  kind  of  devil's  advocate.  The  Labour 
Party  is  irrevocably  established  on  the  economic  necessities  of  the 
common  people.  Perhaps  it  would  be  better  if  shorn  of  some  of  its 
present  members.  If  the  resolution  means  the  withdrawal  of  Clynes 
and  Barnes,  so  much  the  better  for  the  labor  movement. 

As  the  debate  went  on,  as  between  "anti-national  factionalists" 
and  "bitter-endian  jingoes,"  neither  had  the  advantage.  The  posi- 
tion of  the  center  was  strengthened.  W.  Whitefield,  a  delegate  of 
the  Miners'  Federation,  protested  against  Smillie's  views,  saying: 

The  head  of  a  great  organization  should  not  make  speeches  on 
which  the  rank  and  file  are  not  consulted. 

Sylvia  Pankhurst  (of  the  British  Socialist  Party,  with  a  member- 
ship of  10,000)  spoke  of  "labor  members  forced  to  vote  against  30 
shillings  for  agricultural  labor,"  of  "secret  treaties,  covering  not 
only  Alsace-Lorraine,  but  the  left  bank  of  the  Rhine  and  Mesopo- 
tamia," of  "the  atrocious  Japanese  and  Chinese  business,"  of  "the 
Japanese  entering  Russia  to  crush  the  socialist  movement." 

Whitefield  and  Miss  Pankhurst  were  dealt  with  exactly  alike  by 
the  conference.  Their  first  sentences  were  listened  to  in  silent  atten- 
tion. As  Whitefield  proceeded  to  give  a  militant  pro-war  speech, 
and  Miss  Pankhurst  to  give  a  denunciation  of  foreign  policy,  the 
delegates  lost  interest  in  what  had  become  old  stuff,  and  chatted 
among  themselves  till  a  universal  murmur  arose,  with  the  figure  of 
a  kindly  old  man  inaudible  but  gesticulating,  followed  by  a  pretty 
woman,  audible,  earnest,  but  ineffective.  As  the  buzz  of  conversa- 
tion grew  against  Miss.  Pankhurst,  and  as  the  chairman  implored 
her  not  to  roam  the  earth  but  to  speak  to  the  question,  she  said: 


THE  WORKERS  AT  WESTMINSTER  117 

We  want  to  end  the  truce  because,  as  I  say,  our  foreign  policy 
is  wrong.  If  you  don't  fight  bye-elections,  you  are  responsible  for 
foreign  policy,  profiteering,  low  soldiers'  pensions,  massacres  in  Ire- 
land. 

George  N.  Barnes,  one  of  the  eight  labor  members  in  the  Lloyd- 
George  government,  and  successor  to  Henderson  in  the  War  Cabinet, 
spoke  in  a  sad,  tired  voice,  as  if  the  responsibihties  of  his  office  had 
almost  overborne  him.  He  spoke  as  to  a  lost  cause.  He  was  inter- 
rupted with  murmurs  of  dissent.  When  he  said  he  would  regard 
relief  from  office  as  a  "great  deliverance,"  a  mighty  "Oh"  went  up 
from  the  front  seats.  He  had  the  respect  but  not  the  backing  of 
the  majority  in  his  argument  that  labor  must  swallow  the  govern- 
ment policy  whole.    He  said: 

If  you  pass  this  resolution,  it  seems  to  me  you  will  be  driven  to 
take  the  next  step  by  the  logic  of  events.  There  is  a  great  deal  more 
in  the  resolution  than  would  appear  on  the  face  of  it.  This  is  one 
act  of  many  in  the  last  few  years.  This  is  the  culminating  act, 
engineered  by  those  who  have  taken  advantage  of  every  grievance, 
real  or  imaginary,  during  the  last  three  years,  who  have  trotted  out 
imaginary  secret  treaties  (cries  of  "Oh"),  who  have  taken  advantage 
of  our  weariness,  who  have  trotted  out  tales  about  financiers  meet- 
ing abroad,  who  have  done  every  mortal  thing  within  their  power  to 
separate  the  people  from  those  who  are  prosecuting  the  war. 

I  believe  this  resolution  will  have  the  effect  of  weakening  not 
only  the  nation  but  the  Labour  Party.  There  are  many  who  believe 
that  the  Labour  Party  is  stronger  to-day  because  of  the  strenuous 
propaganda  of  Mr.  Smillie  and  his  friends.  I  believe  that  is  a  pro- 
found mistake.  I  believe  that  the  Labour  Party  has  gained  in 
strength  because  of  its  attitude  at  the  beginning  of  the  war  and 
since. 

I  am  in  the  government  as  the  representative  of  the  Labour 
Party.  I'm  going  to  stop  there  till  the  Labour  Party  withdraws  me. 
Consider  the  position  of  divided  allegiance  that  this  resolution  to 
break  the  truce  puts  us  into.  What  am  I  to  do?  ["Get  out,"  a  dele- 
gate shouts.]  I  am  for  this  war.  It  is  a  war  for  the  liberties  of 
people  in  this  and  other  countries.  This  resolution  will  create  polit- 
ical factions.  It  may  have  the  effect  of  getting  the  government  to 
declare  war  against  us.  This  old  country  is,  with  all  its  faults,  the 
best  of  all.  Unity  against  a  common  foe — the  Labour  Party  has 
stood  for  this  for  three  and  a  half  years.  The  resolution  will  put 
snags  in  the  way  of  the  government.  Let  us  reject  the  resolution 
and  reaffirm  our  resolution  to  win  the  war. 

He  told  how  impossible  his  position  would  become  if  the  gov- 
ernment sent  him  to  a  constituency  to  support  the  coalition  candi- 


ii8         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

date  and  the  Labour  Party  asked  him  to  back  the  opposition  candi- 
date. 

Then  rose  J,  R,  Cl5mes. 

As  the  political  writers  used  to  say,  he  is  the  "little  giant"  of 
the  trade  union  political  movement.  He  needs  a  platform  in  order 
to  be  seen,  for  he  is  tiny,  and  they  gave  him  the  platform.  He  is 
clear-thinking  and  direct.  He  is  only  a  few  inches  over  five  feet 
in  height.  His  early  hardships  have  turned  him  gray  and  left  him 
frail.  What  he  said,  at  this  distance  without  the  matrix  of  labor  pol- 
itics and  personal  feeling  which  gave  each  sentence  its  setting,  has 
no  very  spectacular  quality.  But  he  hewed  to  the  shortest  line 
between  positions  which  were  tenable  to  his  fellow  members  in  the 
government  and  to  his  fellows  in  the  "new  majority"  in  the  Labour 
Party — the  line  which  the  conference  took.     He  said: 

I  do  not  go  so  far  as  Mr.  Barnes.  Labor  must  reserve  some 
measure  of  freedom.  I  am  of  the  same  mind  concerning  the  resolr- 
tion  as  that  of  the  executive,  not  caring  much  whether  it's  passed  or 
not.  Do  the  trade  unions  and  constitutional  parts  of  the  labor  move- 
ment want  to  resist  the  government  in  its  opposition  to  German 
aggression?  Let  us  be  fair  in  this  matter  of  passports.  The  Bolshe- 
viki  government  refused  passports  to  socialists.  Other  governments 
have  refused  passports.     They  are  not  predisposed  villains. 

What  is  the  purpose  of  this  resolution?  Is  it  to  make  the  govern- 
ment weaker  in  the  prosecution  of  the  war?  Are  we  labor  members 
to  leave  th§  government  for  the  purpose  of  making  the  government 
stronger  in  the  prosecution  of  war?  I'm  willing  to  take  any  method 
to  test  the  opinion  of  the  rank  and  file  on  this.  Let  one  of  the 
delegates  who  differs  with  me  resign  his  seat  in  his  working  class 
constituency,  and  I'll  resign  mine.  I'm  willing  to  test  out  any  con- 
stituency on  his  position  and  mine.  Is  organized  labor  prepared  to 
barter  Belgium  ?  Is  organized  labor  prepared  to  give  up  the  rights 
of  small  nations?  [A  voice:  "Ireland."]  Is  labor  prepared  to  be 
a  sect  and  sever  itself  from  the  great  national  purpose? 

When  our  inter-Allied  war  aims  reached  Germany,  they  were 
received  with  a  whiff  of  contempt.  [Voice:  "Unfair."  Interrup- 
tions.] 

Are  you  willing  to  fight  for  labor's  war  terms  as  well  as  to 
formulate  them?  I'm  willing  to  take  the  test  this  minute  of  allow- 
ing the  working  class  to  decide  on  my  position. 

Next  came  Ben  Turner,  one  of  the  executives  of  the  Labour 
Party.  He  represents  the  General  Union  of  Textile  Workers  (21,000 
members).    He  said: 

Include  in  that  test  the  soldiers  and  sailors.  The  rank  and  file 
opinion  is  that  they're  as  anxious  for  the  prosecution  of  peace  now 
as  they  were  for  war.     (Cheers  from  most  of  the  delegates.) 


THE  WORKERS  AT  WESTMINSTER  119 

I  ask  our  members  in  the  government,  as  pals  of  my  own,  to  come 
on  the  side  of  the  soldiers  and  sailors  who  want  peace,  and  the 
women  who  want  peace.  There  has  been  much  spoken  here  of 
Germany's  shameful  peace  with  Russia.  Yes,  but  that  was  the  peace 
of  military  victory — a  peace  of  force.  What  the  peoples,  all  the 
people  of  Europe,  need,  is  a  peace  by  negotiation. 

Then  came  the  vote,  1,704,000  in  favor  of  breaking  the  truce 
with  the  government,  951,000  against, — a  majority  of  753,000.  The 
vote  was  a  broad  hint  to  the  administration.  As  one  delegate  ex- 
pressed it — "We  have  a  reactionary  government  This  is  a  kind 
of  warning  to  them  that  they  take  care."  The  Telegraph  (a  semi- 
official government  organ)  scented  danger: 

Its  underlying  purpose  is  not  merely  to  break  the  truce  in  the 
constituencies  but  to  break  the  coalition  government  by  making  the 
position  of  labor  ministers  impossible.  Those  who  engineered  this 
knew  that  any  direct  attack  was  foredoomed  to  failure  because  labor 
remains  as  unshaken  in  its  determination  to  win  the  war  as  it  was 
when  the  first  truce  was  signed.  Robert  Smillie,  the  president  of  the 
Miners'  Federation,  and  possibly  the  most  powerful  figure  in  the 
British  trade  union  movement,  was  in  his  most  aggressive  mood. 
His  speech  was  almost  as  bitter  against  Mr.  Henderson  as  against 
the  government. 

This  was  over-stating  it,  Clynes'  stand,  as  a  member  of  the 
food  administration,  enabled  the  conference  to  break  the  truce  with 
the  government  without  swinging  so  far  to  the  left  as  to  create  the 
impression  of  national  disunity  in  the  face  of  the  German  drive. 
When  he  first  rose  to  speak,  the  delegate  behind  the  writer  said, 
"Now,  he  will  straighten  everything  out."  This  was  less  true  of 
his  remarks  in  the  debate  than  of  the  public  statement  with  which 
he  followed  up  the  vote  and  in  which  he  summed  up  the  action 
taken  as  meaning  not  that  labor  would  lessen  its  support  in  the 
prosecution  of  the  war,  nor  that  representatives  of  labor  would 
cease  to  serve  their  country  in  any  office  of  state;  it  expressed  the 
desire  in  labor  circles  to  put  forward  candidates  in  bye-elections 
without  the  restraint  which  the  party  truce  had  imposed.  Clynes' 
moderate  leadership  made  him  the  outstanding  figure  of  the  confer- 
ence, just  as  in  the  weeks  succeeding  he  became  the  most  talked  of 
man  in  the  whole  labor  movement.  During  the  June  conference, 
he  was  reelected  to  the  executive  committee  of  the  Labour  Party 
by  a  vote  of  over  two  million,  which  was  440,000  more  than  the 
next  in  line.  And  on  Lord  Rhondda's  death,  he  was  made  Food 
Controller  of  Great  Britain. 


120         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 


THE  ERA  OF  RESPONSIBILITY 

Clynes  is  fifty  years  old.  He  went  to  work  as  a  half-timer  in 
the  jenny-gate  at  the  Dowry  Mill,  Oldham,  when  he  was  ten  years 
old.  Two  years  later  he  became  a  full-time  worker.  At  twenty- 
two  he  was  organizer  for  the  Lancashire  district  of  the  Gasworkers' 
and  General  Workers'  Union.  For  twenty-one  years  he  was  secre- 
tary of  the  Oldham  Trades  and  Labour  Council.  For  years  he  has 
been  president  of  the  National  Union  of  General  Workers,  and 
chairman  of  the  National  Federation  of  Labourers'  Unions. 

In  the  House  of  Commons  on  June  6,  he  said  of  his  job:  "The 
joint  efforts  at  the  ministry  of  a  peer  of  the  realm  (Lord  Rhondda) 
and  an  ordinary  laborer  might  be  regarded  as  an  extraordinary  com- 
bination," and  went  on,  in  a  quick  survey  of  food  control  in  the 
island  commonwealth  as  it  had  been  carried  forward  in  the  teeth  of 
U-boats  and  food  profiteers,  of  the  "queue"  agitation  of  the  North- 
cliffe  press,  on  the  one  hand,  and  local  labor  demonstrations  on  the 
other.  As  an  exhibit  of  both  responsible  administration  and  social 
policy,  which  will  weigh  in  the  balance  in  the  trust  which  the  Eng- 
lish people  comes  to  place  in  the  political  labor  movement,  what  he 
said  may  well  be  quoted  here: 

As  to  meat,  the  position  was  that  they  had  eliminated  all  compe- 
tition and  all  profiteering.  Rich  and  poor  were  placed  substantially 
on  the  same  level.  This  had  gone  far  to  restore  the  confidence  of 
the  community  in  regard  to  the  food  situation.  The  meat  problem 
in  a  nutshell  was  this :  they  had  to  arrange  that  the  required  number 
of  beasts  and  sheep  should  be  killed  in  14,000  slaughterhouses,  and 
delivered,  together  with  their  proportion  of  frozen  meat,  to  52,000 
retailers'  shops  through  2,000  local  food  committee  areas,  and  that 
must  be  done  at  the  right  moment,  or  as  near  that  as  possible,  in 
order  to  supply  the  demands  of  40,000,000  consumers.  It  was  not 
too  much  to  say  that  the  meat  coupon  was  honored  as  surely  as  is 
the  British  bank-note. 

An  aspect  of  the  milk  problem  was  that  of  distribution.  During 
the  war  there  had  grown  up  in  this  trade  several  combines  of  very 
great  power.  It  has  been  agreed  that  the  ministry  must  become 
responsible  for  the  wholesale  collection,  utilization  and  distribution 
of  milk. 

Practically  the  whole  of  this  year's  fruit  crop  must  be  reserved 
for  the  jam  manufacturers. 

Between  20  and  30  different  raw  materials  are  included  under  the 
head  of  oils,  fat  and  margarine.  The  productive  capacity  of  the 
margarine  industry  in  this  country  has  increased  fourfold  during 
the  war,  and  we  are  now  entirely  independent  of  foreign  supplies. 

Storage  capacity  has  been  increased  from  32  000,000  to  35,000,000 


THE  WORKERS  AT  WESTMINSTER  121 

cubic  feet.  By  the  end  of  this  year,  our  cold  storage  places  will 
show  an  increase  of  25  per  cent  upon  their  pre-war  capacity. 

We  have  now  535  national  food  kitchens,  and  are  negotiating 
with  local  authorities  for  the  establishment  of  an  additional  500. 

We  have  never  believed  that  we  could  do  much  that  would  be 
popular ;  but  we  do  desire  to  avoid  doing  anything  that  would  be 
harmful  or  unnecessary.  We  want  to  let  the  flow  of  trade  go  its 
usual  course  if  that  flow  is  consistent  with  the  needs  of  the  com- 
munity. If  it  is  not,  there  must  be  checks  and  there  must  be  inter- 
ference and  immediate  action  by  the  Ministry  of  Food. 

It  is  with  Clynes  that  Hoover  dealt  in  reckoning  with  England  in 
striking  a  war  time  equilibrium  in  the  world's  food  supply.  And  it 
is  with  Clynes  that  British  labor  dealt,  in  the  last  analysis,  in  strik- 
ing its  balance  in  supporting  the  war  and  at  the  same  time  project- 
ing its  alternative  working  class  policies,  domestic  and  foreign. 

To  one  who  saw  him  in  action  at  this  June  conference,  he  car- 
ried conviction  that  he  never  would  leave  the  trade  union  movement 
and  the  Labour  Party,  He  would  never  join  a  "split,"  never  lend 
himself  to  a  Morning  Post  trade  union  party.  He  would  always 
test  his  own  position  by  an  appeal  to  a  working  class  constituency. 
He  would  abide  by  their  decision.  If  any  one  thought  he  could  be 
used  to  break  the  labor  movement,  that  person  did  not  know  Clynes. 
The  marks  of  the  sufferings  of  his  early  life  are  on  him.  He  is  of 
the  working  class.  He  will  die  in  their  ditch.  If  organized  labor 
pulled  him  out  of  the  government,  he  would  come.  But  he  would 
put  up  a  stiff  ingenious  fight  before  he  came,  and  would  possibly 
convert  it  to  his  ideas.  For  he  believes  in  both  propaganda  and 
administrative  work.  He  believes  in  labor  when  it  is  declamatory, 
and  dissident,  and  he  believes  in  it  when  it  enters  on  executive 
responsibility.  He  understands  Smillie  and  Walter  Appleton,  Snow- 
den  and  Havelock  Wilson.  He  is  the  greatest  success  of  the  labor 
movement  in  government  work.  One  left  the  conference  feeling  that 
honest,  saddened  George  Barnes  might  drop  out  in  the  next  shuf- 
fle, for  he  had  lost  the  knack  of  popular  appeal.  But  Clynes  would 
continue  in  power,  until  the  parting  of  the  ways,  for  the  government 
of  Britain  had  need  for  him.  He  is  mentally  agile  but  sincere.  He 
is  pure  proletarian.  If  labor  should  come  to  power  in  the  next 
years,  as  the  Tories  forebode,  Clynes  no  less  than  Thomas  and  Hen- 
derson, and  with  greater  experience  in  public  administration  than 
either,  would  be  timber  for  the  premiership.  Any  man  that  could 
hold  his  popularity  after  rationing  food  could  harmonize  a  cabinet. 
To  these  names,  if  the  central  leaders  should  be  frustrated  in  their 
moderate  course  in  a  period  of  dragging  peace  or  of  sharp  cleavages 
in  the  period  of  reconstruction,  were  to  be  added  Smillie  and  Mac- 


122         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

Donald.  And  at  risk  of  restating  from  a  different  angle,  some  of 
the  developments  already  covered  and  some  also  to  be  taken  up 
in  later  chapters,  it  is  important  in  our  interpretation  of  the  crystal- 
lizations of  British  labor  thought,  to  quote  an  interview  which  this 
government  labor  leader,  yet  active  member  of  the  new  majority, 
gave  the  writer  at  the  close  of  this  London  meeting  in  June.  Clynes 
said: 

The  Reform  Bill  has  been  carried,  thus  preparing  the  way  for 
the  General  Election.  The  Bill  tends  to  strengthen  labor.  All  the 
parties  are  preparing  for  the  test  of  strength.  It  is  only  natural 
for  labor  to  secure  freedom  in  order  to  test  its  strength.  The  break- 
ing of  the  truce  does  not  register  the  slightest  tendency  to  lessen  the 
support  by  labor  of  the  government  in  its  war-making. 

On  the  international  situation,  the  attitude  of  labor  is  scarcely 
to  be  distinguished  from  that  of  President  Wilson  in  interpreting 
the  aims  of  America.  Labor  has  held  special  conferences  on  the 
international  situation.  And  also  the  labor  and  socialist  forces  of 
the  allied  nations  have  held  conferences.  Although  America  was 
not  represented,  we  have  had  the  benefit  of  conversations  with  Amer- 
ican delegates  of  labor,  and  the  results  of  our  previous  conferences 
were  quite  in  keeping  with  the  speeches  of  the  American  delegates, 
and  completely  in  line  with  the  expressions  of  President  Wilson. 

Our  inter-Allied  program  declared  that  a  German  victory  would 
be  a  disaster  and  defeat  for  democracy,  and  that  such  an  aggression 
as  Germany  was  guilty  of  upon  Belgium  cannot  be  tolerated  by  a 
democracy.  Germany  has  shown  by  her  policy  in  Russia  (at  Brest- 
Litovsk  and  after)  that  moral  appeals  are  of  no  avail,  and  that 
force  is  the  only  doctrine  which  Germany  recognizes.  The  inter- 
Allied  memorandum  held  that  settlements,  properly  made,  would  set- 
tle internal  affairs  and  international  relations.  Having  laid  down 
such  a  program,  it  has  been  proclaimed  to  the  peoples  of  Germany  and 
Austria.  It  is  for  them  to  reply  whether  they  follow  democratic 
principles  and  laws  of  consent,  instead  of  the  joint  power  of  kaisers 
and  armaments.  Working-class  opinion  will  not  tolerate  any  inter- 
national talks  about  not  waging  the  war  to  the  end,  unless  the  peoples 
of  Germany  and  Austria  signify  their  willingness  and  agreement  to 
these  pronouncements  of  Allied  opinion  which  date  back  as  far  as 
February,  1915. 

For  several  reasons,  of  working  and  wage  conditions,  discontent 
has  arisen,  and  enmity  to  the  government,  among  certain  groups. 
And  that  hostility  to  the  government  has  been  set  up  as  hostility 
to  the  organized  resistance  of  the  government  against  Germany.  It 
is  essential  to  distinguish  here  between  enmity  to  the  government 
and  the  continuing  unity  of  working  class  opinion  on  war  policy. 

The  action  of  certain  local  labor  and  socialist  bodies,  undermin- 
ing the  labor  members  of  the  Government,  has  provoked  the  retalia- 
tion of  the  threat  to  start  a  purely  trade  union  political  party.     Our 


THE  WORKERS  AT  WESTMINSTER  123 

own  desire  is  to  regard  these  differences  as  temporary  and  subordi- 
nate. The  unity  of  the  nation  cannot  be  maintained  without  unity 
of  the  parties — certainly  not  without  the  unity  of  the  Labour  Party. 
It  is  therefore  unlikely  that  there  will  be  very  much  response  to 
the  suggestion  of  starting  a  trade  union  political  party.  But  the 
protests  may  do  good  in  showing  a  resentment  against  the  action 
taken  by  certain  local  labor  and  socialist  bodies  in  their  attacks  on 
labor  men  in  the  government. 

Recently  an  editor  had  attacked  Clynes.  Controversy  is  one  of 
the  things  he  does  best.    He  said: 

Dear  Sir, 

In  your  last  issue  you  indicate  that  I  "even  went  so  far  as  to  say 
that  labor  could  not  produce  enough  able  men  to  form  a  govern- 
ment." I  send  you  this  note  chiefly  to  deny  this  statement.  Even  if 
I  thought  it  was  so,  no  labor  man  need  go  out  of  his  way  to  say 
such  a  thing,  as  I  hope  that  enough  able  men  will  in  due  course  be 
found  in  the  ranks  of  labor  fit  for  any  national  duty  to  which  labor 
might  be  called. 

And  further: 

You  state  that  "the  government  has  mocked  at  every  suggestion 
of  discussing  peace  on  the  great  basic  principles  laid  down  by  Presi- 
dent Wilson,  and  has  rejected  with  contempt  eight  or  nine  peace 
offers."  Such  statements  as  these  are  doing  great  mischief.  They 
are  wholly  untrue.  If  they  were  correct,  I  can  assure  you  that 
important  as  administrative  work  may  be  I  could  accept  no  respon- 
sibility in  a  government  which  would  mock  at  suggestions  of  Peace 
on  the  principles  of  the  American  President.  Immediately  after 
reading  your  article,  I  read  the  speech  of  the  Prime  Minister  in 
France  last  Friday  and  if  you  refer  to  the  speech  you  will  find  that 
Mr.  Lloyd  George  said,  "If  the  kaiser  and  his  advisers  will  accept 
the  conditions  voiced  by  the  president  they  can  have  peace  with 
America,  peace  with  France  and  peace  with  Great  Britain  to-mor- 
row." 

I  trouble  you  with  this  note,  because  the  nearer  labor  approaches 
an  era  of  responsibility,  the  nearer  labor  should  keep  to  absolute 
facts  in  discussing  issues  of  such  tremendous  import  to  all  of  us. 


Parenthetically  it  may  v/cll  be  noted  here  that  it  was  not  until 
the  war  was  won,  with  the  general  election  still  to  come,  that  the 
Labour  Party  called  its  members  out  of  the  government.  This, 
with  the  armistice  signed  and  the  general  election  set  for  December 
it  did  on  November  14,  1918.     Barnes,  defeated  for  the  Labour 


124        THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

Party  nomination  in  his  own  constituency,  threw  in  his  lot  with 
the  new  Lloyd  George  coalition;  Clynes  argued  in  the  November 
party  conference  against  the  resolution,  but  responded  to  it,  with- 
drew from  the  coalition  and  campaigned  for  labor.     [Page  269.] 

So  long  as  Prussian  militarism  kept  the  field,  as  foe  to  the  nation, 
labor  kept  the  faith  and  held  to  the  all-England  alignment.  Then  it 
made  its  clean  cut  break  with  the  war-time  coalition  in  order,  for 
better  or  worse,  to  enter  the  peace  on  its  own  footing  and  v/ith  its 
worker's  program  for  national  and  international  reconstruction. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER 

"There  are  bushels  of  them  piled  up  on  the  floor.  We  have  never 
had  such  a  mail,"  said  James  Middleton  at  the  Labour  Party  head- 
quarters, I  Victoria  Street,  London,  the  Monday  following  the  Not- 
tingham meeting.  Middleton  is  assistant  secretary;  which  is  official 
language  for  Henderson's  right  hand.  The  public  will,  perchance, 
never  know  what  the  labor  leaders  know — how  much  in  actual  exe- 
cution of  their  political  and  international  offensives  has  hung  on  the 
deft  ministration  of  this  indefatigable,  unobtrusive  man  with  the 
details  at  his  finger  tips.  Under  various  titles  and  in  quaint  dis- 
guises, you  can  find  him  and  his  kind  if  you  dig  deep  enough  into 
any  organized  social  movement  that,  against  all  the  prophets,  seems 
to  run  on  some  innate  momentum  of  its  own.  The  bushels  of  mail 
were  requests  for  copies  of  the  report  on  reconstruction  issued  the 
week  before,  under  the  title  Labour  and  the  New  Social  Order}  Few 
committee  reports  have  ever  so  struck  fire  in  the  public  imagina- 
tion at  home  and  abroad. 

Its  reprint  as  a  supplement  by  the  New  Republic  in  March, 
1918,  led  to  the  circulation  of  thousands  of  copies  in  the  United 
States.  It  was  hailed  by  radicals  everywhere,  and  stimulated  such 
progressive  thinkers  as  Winston  Churchill  to  explore  the  possibilities 
of  an  American  contribution  ^  which  would  reflect  our  less  stratified 
social  composition,  and  would  approach  the  future  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  community  as  a  whole.  Some  of  the  more  progressive 
labor  bodies — from  state  federations  in  the  far  northwest  to  inde- 
pendent unions  in  New  York — set  out  to  spread  the  British  pro- 
gram. The  American  Socialist  Party — at  the  extreme  left  on  the 
war  issues — and  the  Social  Democratic  League — its  pro-war  off- 
shoot to  the  extreme  right — brought  out  domestic  platforms  in  ad- 
vance of  the  fall  elections  (1918),  which  were  clearly  attempts  to 
parallel  its  success  in  attracting  public  attention.  The  American 
Federation  of  Labor,  at  its  annual  convention  in  June,  was  bare  of 
any  "glorious  reconstruction  ideal  .  .  .  painted  by  any  word  brush," 
to  use  Gompers'  phrases,  and  seemed  strangely  inhibited  from  ad- 

*  Appendix  IV. 

'"'A  Traveller  in  War  Time"   (1918). 

125 


126        THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

dressing  itself  to  the  larger  economic  issues  growing  out  of  the 
war.  Provision  was  made,  however,  for  the  appointment  of  a  com- 
mittee to  take  up  the  subject  of  reconstruction.  Similar  provision 
had  already  been  arranged  for  in  the  spring  (on  a  joint  basis  for 
employers  and  employees)  by  one  of  the  subsidiary  bodies  of  the 
National  Civic  Federation,  which  was  all  of  a  twitter  lest  the 
socialists  and  the  Bolsheviki  should  meddle  up  America  after  the 
war. 

In  the  United  States,  the  British  statement,  indeed,  provoked 
dissent  from  organizers  of  big  business  and  big  labor  alike.  In 
arranging  a  meeting  for  its  discussion,  the  secretary  of  the  Boston 
City  Club  found  a  copy  on  the  desk  of  the  president  of  the  largest 
public  service  corporation  in  the  country,  swept  clean  of  everything 
else  but  an  inkwell  and  this  British  statement  which  he  regarded  as 
the  most  brilliant  prospectus  he  had  ever  read,  a  challenge  to  Amer- 
ican capitalists  to  match  it  with  a  large  scale  scheme  for  national 
development  which  would  counter  at  a  tangent  its  revolutionary 
bent.  Soon  after  the  report  was  given  out,  the  American  Federa- 
tionist,  the  organ  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  called  it 
"comprehensive,  fine  in  spirit,  tremendously  hopeful  in  outlook." 
Americans  instinctively  recoil  at  the  wording  "workers  by  hand  or  by 
brain";  it  rubs  our  democratic  feeling  the  wrong  way  of  the  fur. 
But  while  resenting  the  "invidious  distinction  implied  in  the  phrase 
used  in  the  British  document,"  Gompers  editorially  served  notice 
that  on  this  side  of  the  water  wage-earners  are  entirely  competent 
"to  determine  and  formulate  their  own  poHcies"  without  alloy  of 
what  "in  other  countries"  are  called  "the  intellectuals."  The  Amer- 
ican labor  movement  was  to  be  kept  bonafide,  and  the  British  policy 
of  expanding  and  appealing  to  a  wider  constituency  struck  no  an- 
swering chord. 

Also,  in  pointing  out  that  the  British  document  formulated  the 
problems  "as  political  issues  and  the  agency  designated  is  the  polit- 
ical party,"  Gompers  reaffirmed  his  life-long  policy  that  wage-earn- 
ers should  exert  themselves  through  the  unions  rather  than  through 
a  political  labor  movement.  More,  he  has  acted  on  the  principle 
that  they  should  not,  by  coming  to  depend  too  much  on  labor 
legislation,  weaken  the  organized  power  of  a  strong  dues-paying 
membership  to  bargain  for  standards  in  trade  agreements.  Thus, 
he  has  opposed  agitation  to  secure  eight  hour  laws  (as  shifting  re- 
liance from  the  unions  to  the  government) ;  he  was  slow  to  take 
up  the  workmen's  compensation  movement  in  its  early  days,  and 
he  threw  his  weight  against  public  schemes  for  sickness  insurance 
— a  position  on  which  the  New  York  State  Federation  of  Labor,  for 
example,  broke  with  him.    Underneath  it  all,  Gompers  has  accepted 


LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER  127 

the  present  capitalistic  order,  if  tempered  by  collective  bargaining. 
While  resisting  movements  to  create  a  labor  party  and  preferring 
to  use  the  potential  political  strength  of  the  labor  movement  to  force 
gains  first  from  the  Republicans  and  then  the  Democrats,  he  has 
consistently  fought  socialism  and  all  its  works. 

"The  heart  of  the  American  labor  movement  is  economic,"  he 
said  in  discussing  the  British  Labour  Party's  report.  "Labour's 
welfare  and  protection  is  regarded  as  fundamentally  an  economic 
problem  to  be  dealt  with  by  economic  agencies."    And  again — 

The  democracy  of  the  American  labor  movement  is  of  the  same 
nature  as  that  of  our  republic.  It  is  more  hearty,  more  sincere,  and 
more  far-reaching  than  the  democracy  of  any  other  country. 

So  the  American  reader  finishes  the  document  entitled  Labor  and 
the  New  Social  Order  with  a  feeling  of  exultation  stirred  by  the 
hope  of  what  the  future  may  bring,  but  when  he  turns  to  concrete 
problems  that  must  be  worked  out  to-day  and  to-morrow,  and  through 
each  day  that  follows,  he  finds  little  practical  help  for  real  achieve- 
ments. In  the  future,  as  in  the  past,  we  must  trust  in  the  economic 
organization  of  the  workers. 

In  Great  Britafn,  on  the  contrary,  as  brought  out  in  the  last 
chapter,  the  political  movement  long  since  proved  its  worth  to  the 
minds  of  the  workers.  During  a  period  of  thirty  years,  the  emphasis 
has  swung  to  and  fro  between  the  economic  and  political  fields  of 
activity,  as  labor  has  been  thwarted  in  one,  or  had  its  hopes  dashed 
in  the  other.  But  out  of  gains,  first  in  one  direction  and  then  in 
the  other,  had  come  reliance  on  the  two  methods — not  as  things 
antagonistic,  but  as  things  complementary — (a  dual  procedure  which, 
incidentally,  made  a  two-edged  war  policy  fit  into  their  habit  of 
mind). 

Now,  at  a  time  when,  as  we  shall  see  more  clearly  in  later  pages, 
the  familiar  economic  machinery  of  collective  bargaining  had  been 
"interned"  for  the  war,  the  political  arm  of  the  labor  movement 
came  forward  with  its  vigorous  presentment  of  political  action.  The 
circumstances  would  have  won  for  it  in  any  case  a  working-class 
following  far  out-numbering  the  membership  of  the  Labour  Party. 
But  with  the  general  ferment  affecting  all  sorts  and  conditions  of 
men — and  with  no  such  comprehensive  social  program  put  forth 
by  any  of  the  older  parties, — the  labor  report  on  reconstruction  fairly 
hit  the  British  public  between  the  eyes. 

It  came  before  the  party  conference  in  June  after  four  months' 
discussion  by  unions,  trades  councils  and  party  locals,  and  was 
given  effect  by  a  series  of  27  resolutions.    In  make-up  and  temper, 


128         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

this  June  meeting  made  much  the  same  impression  upon  the  joint 
author  of  this  book  as  the  Nottingham  meeting  had  made  on  his 
collaborator.  His  rough  notes  contained  four  phrases  which  he 
scribbled  down  in  the  thick  of  the  conference  as  giving  its  feel  to 
an  outsider.  These  phrases  were  "gray  hairs,"  "common  sense," 
"win  the  war,"  "our  country." 

''Gray  hairs":  The  conference,  while  containing  young  men  and 
many  men  still  in  young  middle  life,  was  for  the  majority  made  up 
of  men  going  gray,  settled,  mature.  For  young  leadership,  it  would 
be  necessary  to  wait  until  the  war  was  ended. 

"Common  sense":  The  appeal  that  infallibly  won  the  confer- 
ence was  not  to  the  emotions.  It  was  not  that  of  cleverness.  It 
was  the  hard,  plain  statement  of  the  commonsense  position.  Brit- 
ish labor  distrusts  the  extremist,  and  this  applies  as  much  to  those 
on  the  right,  the  Tory  reactionary,  the  military  Jingo,  as  to  the 
revolutionary  and  the  extreme  pacifist.  This  is  where  American 
labor  visitors  made  their  mistake.  They  saw  that  extremists  like 
the  Bolshevik  ambassador  from  abroad  or  Havelock  Wilson  of  the 
British  sailors  received  freedom  of  speech.  The  British  worker 
applauds  any  honest,  sincere  statement.  He  gives  his  respect  to  any 
good  fighter.  But  he  gives  his  vote  and  his  intellectual  allegiance 
to  the  middle-of-the-way  man  who  shows  a  working  compromise. 

"Win  the  War":  An  earlier  chapter  brought  out  how  this  June 
meeting  reaffirmed  the  war  policy  of  British  labor — its  linking  of  a 
moral  and  political  offensive  with  resistance  to  Prussian  militarism 
in  the  field.  It  expressed  its  will  to  win  the  war,  from  the  keynote 
opening  speech  of  the  chairman  to  the  angry  vigor  of  its  resolution 
for  a  substantial  increase  in  the  separation  allowances  for  the  fam- 
ilies of  fighting  men.  Nothing  so  stirred  the  wrath  of  the  labor 
conference  as  the  report  of  official  slights  to  the  discharged  sol- 
diers. There  were  cries  of  shame  when  a  delegate  told  of  742 
soldiers  and  their  dependents  in  one  district  on  charity  under  a  poor 
law  board  of  guardians. 

"Our  Country":  They  have  a  great  pride  in  their  country,  these 
English  labor  men.  Underlying  every  sharp  criticism  of  govern- 
ment policy  was  the  love  of  the  Briton  for  his  native  land.  British 
labor  will  never  be  international  in  the  sense  of  a  disappearance  of 
the  instinct  of  nationality. 

Each  of  these  characteristics  found  illustration  in  speeches  from 
the  floor  by  delegates.  As  the  reconstruction  plan  had  been  before 
the  constituent  bodies  for  six  months  and  the  resolutions  were 
kindred  to  those  passed  at  earlier  party  conferences,  they  went 
through  swiftly  with  little  debate.  Right,  left  and  center  on  the 
war  issues,  were  at  one  on  the  reconstruction  program.    Said  Presi- 


LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER  129 

dent  Purdy  (Shipconstructors  and  Shipwrights'  Association,  33,000 
members)  at  the  opening  session: 

All  plans  of  reconstruction,  all  hopes  of  rebuilding-  a  better  social 
and  industrial  life  after  the  war,  depend  on  one  cardinal  fact,  and 
that  is  winning  the  war.  The  trade  union  and  labor  movement  have 
declared  that  they  want  no  inconclusive  peace.  This  is  no  time  to 
divide  forces,  whether  inside  or  outside  the  party.  The  way  to  con- 
solidate the  party  is  not  by   forming  a  new  party. 

We  need  the  industrial  wing  to  be  allied  to  the  political  wing  of 
the  movement.  But  a  national  party,  such  as  is  now  aimed  at, 
cannot  be  built  up  on  a  purely  industrial  or  craft  basis.  A  strong 
industrial  organization,  backed  up  by  a  strong  political  labor  party, 
is  the  only  hope  of  the  workers  in  the  future. 

Said  Ramsay  MacDon  'id: 

We  are  divided  on  certain  current  issues,  but  not  on  issues  of 
reconstruction.  Capitalism  is  characterized  by  inefficiency  and  waste, 
by  managers  who  can't  manage.  A  pool  of  all  the  little  exploita- 
tions will  make  a  reservoir  of  plenty.  Internationally,  we  are  not 
out  for  a  balance  of  power  (as  in  the  Whitley  report  in  industry), 
nor  for  a  League  of  Powers — but  for  a  Society  of  Nations. 

These  resolutions  on  reconstruction  make  no  attempt  to  repeat 
our  constitution;  they  are  elaborate  footnotes  to  the  constitution. 

Of  the  reconstruction  program  as  a  whole,  J.  H,  Thomas  (Rail- 
waymen,  400,000  members)  said  that  the  workers  recognized  the 
miserable  poverty  and  degradation  in  which  they  had  lived  in  the 
past.  If  the  nation  could  spend  eight  millions  in  pounds  sterling  a 
day  in  the  destruction  of  humanity  it  could  find  some  millions  for 
reconstruction.  He  pointed  out  that  eleven  million  people  would 
need  employment  when  the  war  ends: 

The  employers  will  make  the  effort  to  rid  themselves  of  abnormal 
wages.  The  cost  of  living  cannot  be  reduced.  So  we  shall  have 
(i)   a  glut  in  the  labor  market. 

(2)  an  annual  debt  of  six  hundred  million  pounds. 

(3)  increased  cost  of  living. 

(4)  a  tendency  to  cut  wages. 

The  success  of  the  Labour  Party  will  depend  on  solving  some 
of  these  great  problems.  It  means  the  taking  over  of  railways, 
mines,  munition  factories.  Unrestricted  competition  and  individual 
direction  were  found  a  menace  in  time  of  war.  So  we  point  out  that 
as  regards  the  mass  of  human  beings  they  are  wrong  in  peace.  Indi- 
viduals cannot  be  trusted  to  control  that  of  which  they  don't  believe 
in  the  policy.  The  danger  to  labor  is  not  that  it  will  be  defeated 
by  strength  and  wealth  but  by  intrigues  of  its  own. 


130        THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

labor's  plan  for  reconstruction  ^ 

Report  and  resolutions  are  published  in  the  appendix  to  this 
book.^  The  former  must  be  read  in  full  to  get  the  sweep  and  spirit 
of  its  message.  No  attempt  can  be  made  here  to  debate  the  main 
propositions,  ranging  as  they  do  over  the  entire  field  of  economics 
and  domestic  affairs,  just  as  no  attempt  was  made  earlier  to  debate 
British  labor  policy  with  respect,  for  example,  to  disarmament  of 
the  Balkans.  Our  task  is  the  simpler  one  of  interpreting  the  gen- 
eral development  and  intention  of  the  movement.  But  to  do  that 
it  is  necessary  to  grasp  its  approach  to  the  common  task  of  recon- 
struction, as  put  in  the  smashing  indictment  which  opened  the  docu- 
ment: 

We  need  to  beware  of  patchwork.  The  view  of  the  Labour  Party 
is  that  what  has  to  be  reconstructed  after  the  war  is  not  this  or  that 
government  department,  or  this  or  that  piece  of  social  machinery; 
but,  so  far  as  Britain  is  concerned,  society  itself.  The  individual 
worker,  or  for  that  matter  the  individual  statesman,  immersed  in 
daily  routine — like  the  individual  soldier  in  a  battle — easily  fails 
to  understand  the  magnitude  and  far-reaching  importance  of  what 
is  taking  place  around  him.  How  does  it  fit  together  as  a  whole  ? 
How  does  it  look  from  a  distance?  Count  Okuma,  one  of  the  oldest, 
most  experienced  and  ablest  of  the  statesmen  of  Japan,  watching  the 
present  conflict  from  the  other  side  of  the  globe,  declares  it  to  be 
nothing  less  than  the  death  of  European  civilization.  Just  as  in  the 
past  the  civilizations  of  Babylon,  Egypt,  Greece,  Carthage  and  the 
g'reat  Roman  Empire  have  been  successively  destroyed,  so,  in  the 
judgment  of  this  detached  observer,  the  civilization  of  all  Europe 
is  even  now  receiving  its  death-blow.  We  of  the  Labour  Party 
can  so  far  agree  in  this  estimate  as  to  recognize,  in  the  present  world 
catastrophe,  if  not  the  death,  in  Europe,  of  civilization  itself,  at 
any  rate,  the  culmination  and  collapse  of  a  distinctive  industrial 
civilization,  which  the  workers  will  not  seek  to  reconstruct.  At 
such  times  of  crisis  it  is  easier  to  slip  into  ruin  than  to  progress  into 
higher  forms  or  organizations.  That  is  the  problem  as  it  presents 
itself  to  the  Labour  Party  to-day. 

What  this  war  is  consuming  is  not  merely  the  security,  the  homes, 
the  livelihood  and  the  lives  of  millions  of  innocent  families,  and  an 
enormous  proportion  of  all  the  accumulated  wealth  of  the  world, 
but  also  the  very  basis  of  the  peculiar  social  order  in  which  it  has 
arisen.  The  individualist  system  of  capitalist  production,  based  on 
the  private  ownership  and  competitive  administration  of  land  and 
capital,  with  its  reckless  "profiteering"  and  wage-slavery ;  with  its 
glorification  of  the  unhampered  struggle  for  the  means  of  life  and 
its  hypocritical  pretence  of  the  "survival  of  the  fittest";  with  the 

*  Report,  Appendix  IV;  resolutions,  Appendix  V. 


LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER  131 

monstrous  inequality  of  circumstances  which  it  produces  and  the 
degradation  and  brutalization,  both  moral  and  spiritual,  resulting 
therefrom,  may,  we  hope,  indeed  have  received  a  death-blow.  With 
it  must  go  the  political  system  and  ideas  in  which  it  naturally  found 
expression.  We  of  the  Labour  Party,  whether  in  opposition  or  in 
due  time  called  upon  to  form  an  administration,  will  certainly  lend 
no  hand  to  its  revival.  On  the  contrary,  we  shall  do  our  utmost  to 
see  that  it  is  buried  with  the  millions  whom  it  has  done  to  death. 
If  we  in  Britain  are  to  escape  from  the  decay  of  civilization  itself, 
which  the  Japanese  statesman  foresees,  we  must  insure  that  what 
is  presently  to  be  built  up  is  a  new  social  order,  based  not  on  fight- 
ing but  on  fraternity — not  on  the  competitive  struggle  for  the  means 
of  bare  life,  but  on  a  deliberately  planned  cooperation  in  produc- 
tion and  distribution  for  the  benefit  of  all  who  participate  by  hand 
or  by  brain — not  on  the  utmost  possible  inequality  of  riches,  but  on 
a  systematic  approach  towards  a  healthy  equality  of  material  cir- 
cumstances for  every  person  born  into  the  world — not  on  an  en- 
forced dominion  over  subject  nations,  subject  races,  subject  colonies, 
subject  classes,  or  a  subject  sex,  but,  in  industry,  as  well  as  in 
government,  on  that  equal  freedom,  that  general  consciousness  of 
consent,  and  that  widest  possible  participation  in  power,  both  eco- 
nomic and  political,  which  is  characteristic  of  democracy.  We  do 
not,  of  course,  pretend  that  it  is  possible,  even  after  the  drastic  clear- 
ing away  that  is  now  going  on,  to  build  society  anew  in  a  year  or 
two  of  feverish  "Reconstruction."  What  the  Labour  Party  intends 
to  satisfy  itself  about  is  that  each  brick  that  it  helps  to  lay  shall  go 
to  erect  the  structure  that  it  intends,  and  no  other. 

What,  then,  do  the  British  workers  stand  for  in  building  their 
new  house  "upon  the  common  foundation  of  the  democratic  control 
of  society  in  all  its  activities"? 

They  stand  in  the  first  place  for  some  things  on  which  the  gen- 
eral American  public  would  back  them  up  without  question. 

They  stand  for  free  public  education — and  they  stand  for  it  for 
the  children  of  the  whole  working  class — for  all  the  children  of 
Great  Britain.  Secondary  and  higher  schools  are  not  free  schools 
in  England.  The  elementary  schools  are  inadequate  in  numbers, 
teachers,  curriculum.  The  workers  are  out  for  an  educational  sys- 
tem comparable  with  the  best  America  has  to  offer  from  kinder- 
garten to  university,  free,  public,  as  a  basis  for  fitting  the  oncom- 
ing generation  of  British  workers  to  run  England. 

They  are  out  for  a  ministry  of  health  and  a  radical  reorganiza- 
tion of  the  whole  scheme  of  building  up  the  physical  fitness  of  their 
own  kind,  such  as  the  recruiting  experience  had  shown  was  all  too 
much  needed.  They  stand  out,  to  use  Sidney  Webb's  phrase,  "for 
the  universal  enforcement  of  the  national  minimum;"  for  the 
strengthening  of  the  factory,  compensation  and  insurance  acts  gov- 


132         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

erning  hours,  health,  unemployment  and  the  like:  in  other  words, 
to  lay  a  floor  of  standards  beneath  which  no  industrial  operations 
shall  be  carried  on  in  England.  They  stand  for  giving  an  entirely 
new  embodiment  to  home  life  among  the  workers  of  Great  Britain 
by  far-reaching  housing  and  city  building  schemes,  and  they  speak 
in  terms  of  a  million  new  cottages  and  an  outlay  of  three  million 
sterling  for  rehousing  in  mining  villages,  rural  districts  and  town 
slums. 

They  sensed  an  attempt  to  reduce  wages  when  the  troops  come 
home,  to  take  advantage  of  the  dislocation  of  demobilization  to 
worsen  the  conditions  of  employment  and  to  leave  to  private  char- 
ity the  handling  of  unemployment.  They  call  for  a  revolution  of 
the  poor  law  and  for  deliberate  national  organization  to  meet  unem- 
ployment in  advance,  by  public  works  in  housing,  school  building, 
transport  and  road  building,  afforestation  and  the  breaking  up  of 
great  estates  into  cooperative  small  holdings;  by  raising  the  school- 
leaving  age  to  sixteen,  by  shortening  the  hours  of  labor  of  young 
persons  and  by  initiating  the  universal  eight-hour  day. 

In  the  political  field,  the  party  stands  for  the  complete  removal 
of  all  the  wartime  restrictions  on  "freedom  of  speech,  freedom  of 
publication,  freedom  of  the  press,  freedom  of  travel,  freedom  of 
choice  of  place  of  residence,  and  freedom  of  employment  the  day 
after  peace  is  declared."  To  quote  a  speaker  on  the  floor  of  the 
June  conference: 

A  man  with  his  hand  crippled  has  been  in  prison  for  two  years 
for  refusing  military  examination,  because  he  is  a  conscientious 
objector.  He  is  now  doing  time  in  a  stone  quarry.  When  the  names 
of  our  heroes  at  the  front  are  placed  on  a  monument  in  some  fair 
square  of  the  city,  may  the  names  of  the  conscientious  objectors  be 
there,  beside  them. 

It  cannot  be  said  the  workers  as  a  whole  understood  or  sympathized 
with  the  principles  of  the  conscientious  objectors,  much  less  shared 
their  feelings.  But  they  understood  and  were  aroused  by  the  treat- 
ment accorded  them  in  prison.  That  awakened  old  echoes  of  the 
treatment  accorded  labor  leaders  in  the  long  struggle  for  the  right 
to  organize,  and  it  provoked  the  quick  recognition  that  without 
their  organized  power,  their  own  strike  leaders  in  wartime  would 
have  been  handled  no  differently. 

In  the  debates  at  the  June  conference,  working-class  resistance  to 
any  attempt  to  carry  over  military  me'thods  into  the  industrial  life, 
or  perpetuate  them  under  a  peace  economy  was  voiced  by  W.  C. 
Anderson,  member  of  Parliament  from  the  Independent  Labour 
Party  (left): 


LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER  133 

The  new  spirit  requires  new  machinery,  and  labor  ought  to  give 
a  clear  lead.  The  military  service  acts  are  being  used  more  and  more 
for  industrial  conscription.  Labor  must  conquer  the  government. 
Labor  must  be  the  government.  Labor  must  make  the  laws,  not  for 
a  small  section,  but  for  the  whole  community. 

He  spoke  of  the  new  grades  of  military  service  for  the  ages  of 
forty-one  years  to  fifty-one  years: 

They  believe  they  will  be  sent  to  the  front.  The  government  says 
to  them,  "If  you  will  place  yourselves  in  our  power  and  be  sent 
anywhere  we  say,  you  will  be  exempted  from  military  service."  This 
is  industrial  compulsion.  Either  they  should  be  sent  into  the  army 
or  be  left  free  as  a  civilian. 

Labor  is  of  one  mind  with  respect  to  peace  time  conscription, 
military  no  less  than  industrial.  It  took  its  stand  against  "any 
continuation  of  the  military  service  acts  a  moment  longer  than  the 
imperative  requirements  of  the  war  excuse." 

But  "individual  freedom  is  of  little  use  without  complete  polit- 
ical rights."    The  Labour  Party 

sees  its  repeated  demands  largely  conceded  in  the  present  representa- 
tion of  the  people  act,  but  not  yet  wholly  satisfied.  The  party  stands, 
as  heretofore,  for  complete  adult  suffrage  .  .  .  effective  provision 
for  absent  electors  to  vote,  for  absolutely  equal  rights  for  both  sexes, 
for  the  same  freedom  to  exercise  civic  rights  for  the  common  soldier 
as  for  the  officer,  for  shorter  parliaments,  for  the  complete  abolition 
of  the  House  of  Lords,  and  for  a  most  strenuous  opposition  to  any 
new  second  chamber,  whether  elected  or  not,  having  in  it  any  ele- 
ment of  heredity  or  privilege,  or  of  the  control  of  the  House  of 
Commons  by  any  party  or  class. 

Labor  stands  for  absolute  autonomy  of  each  self-governing  part 
of  the  Empire,  for  "home  rule  all  around,"  and  for  an  imperial 
council  which  would  express  the  democratized  spirit  of  "the  Bri- 
tannic Alliance." 

We  now  come  to  the  larger  economic  proposals  on  which  there 
is  bound  to  be  much  friction.  "What  the  nation  needs  is  undoubt- 
edly a  great  bound  onward  on  its  aggregate  productivity."  But 
this  to  labor's  mind 

cannot  be  secured  merely  by  pressing  the  manual  workers  to  more 
strenuous  toil,  or  even  by  encouraging  the  "Captains  of  Industry" 
to  a  less  wasteful  organization  of  their  several  enterprises  on  a 
profit-making  basis. 

What  the  Labour  Party  looks  to  is: 


134         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

A  genuinely  scientific  reorganization  of  the  nation's  industry,  no 
longer  deflected  by  individual  profiteering,  on  the  basis  of  the  com- 
mon ownership  of  the  means  of  production ;  the  equitable  sharing 
of  the  proceeds  among  all  who  participate  in  any  capacity  and  only 
among  these,  and  the  adoption,  in  particular  services  and  occupa- 
tions, of  those  systems  and  methods  of  administration  and  control 
that  may  be  found,  in  practice,  best  to  promote,  not  profiteering, 
but  the  public  interest. 

To  this  end  the  party  stands  "not  merely  for  the  principle  of 
common  ownership  of  the  nation's  land,  but  for  a  unified  national 
service  of  communication  and  transport,  to  be  worked  unhampered 
by  capitalist,  private,  or  purely  local  interests  (and  with  a  steadily 
increasing  participation  of  the  organized  workers  in  the  manage- 
ment, both  central  and  local)  exclusively  for  the  common  good"; 
for  the  erection  of  a  score  of  gigantic  super-power  stations,  "which 
would  generate,  at  incredibly  cheap  rates,  enough  electricity  for  the 
use  of  every  industrial  establishment  and  every  private  household  in 
Great  Britain";  for  "the  immediate  nationalization  of  mines,  the 
extraction  of  coal  and  iron  being  worked  as  a  public  service  (with 
a  steadily  increasing  participation  in  the  management,  both  central 
and  local,  of  the  various  grades  of  persons  employed)."  The  work- 
ers want  household  coal  of  standard  quality,  at  "a  fixed  and  uni- 
form price  for  the  whole  kingdom,  payable  by  rich  and  poor  alike, 
as  unalterable  as  the  penny  postage  stamp."  Similarly,  they  advo- 
cate the  expropriation  of  the  profit-making  industrial  insurance 
companies  which  "now  so  tyrannously  exploit  the  people  with  their 
wasteful  house-to-house  industrial  life  assurance,"  and  they  advo- 
cate local  option  and  "taking  the  entire  manufacture  and  retailing 
of  alcoholic  drink  out  of  the  hands  of  those  who  find  profit  in  pro- 
moting the  utmost  possible  consumption." 

The  party  takes  ground  against  allowing  the  government  con- 
trol over  the  importations  of  wheat,  wool,  metals  and  other  com- 
modities to  "slip  back  into  the  unfettered  control  of  private  cap- 
italists, who  are,  actually  at  the  instance  of  the  government  itself, 
now  rapidly  combining,  trade  by  trade,  into  monopolist  trusts, 
which  may  presently  become  as  ruthless  in  their  extortion  as  the 
worst  American  examples."     To  quote: 

Standing,  as  it  does,  for  the  democratic  control  of  industry,  the 
Labour  Party  would  think  twice  before  it  sanctioned  any  abandon- 
ment of  the  present  profitable  centralization  of  purchase  of  raw 
material;  of  the  present  carefully  organized  "rationing"  by  joint 
committees  of  the  trades  concerned,  of  the  several  establishments 
with  the  materials  they  require;  of  the  present  elaborate  system  of 
"costing"  and  public  audit  of  manufacturers'  accounts,  so  as  to  stop 


LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER  135 

the  waste  heretofore  caused  by  the  mechanical  inefficiency  of  the 
more  backward  firms ;  of  the  present  salutary  publicity  of  manufac- 
turing processes  and  expenses  hereby  insured ;  and,  on  the  informa- 
tion thus  obtained  (in  order  never  again  to  revert  to  the  old  time 
profiteering),  of  the  present  rigid  fixing,  for  standardized  products, 
of  maximum  prices  at  the  factory,  at  the  warehouse  of  the  whole- 
sale trader  and  in  the  retail  shop. 

Labor  holds  that  it  is  just  as  much  the  function  of  the  government 
to  protect  private  consumers  as  to  protect,  through  the  factory 
acts,  the  wage  earning  producers. 

To  provide  the  revenue  to  meet  the  cost  of  the  war  and  to  make 
the  constructive  investment  for  national  production  outlined,  the 
Labour  Party  repudiates  all  proposals  for  a  protective  tariff,  strenu- 
ously opposes  any  taxation  which  would  increase  the  price  of  food, 
and  objects  to  any  taxes  interfering  with  production,  commerce, 
transport  or  communication.  Rather,  it  turns  its  eyes  on  the  hold- 
ings of  what  it  describes  as  "that  one- tenth  of  the  population  which 
owns  nine-tenths  of  the  riches  of  the  United  Kingdom."  It  would 
extend  the  Excess  Profits  Tax,  increase  the  Mineral  Rights  Duty 
and  bring  "the  steadily  rising  unearned  increment  of  urban  and 
mineral  land  .  .  .  wholly  .  .  .  into  the  public  exchequer."  It 
stands  for  paying  off  the  national  debt  by  the  direct  taxation  of 
private  fortunes  both  during  life  and  after  death.  It  proposes  to 
rearrange  the  "whole  taxation  of  inheritance  from  the  standpoint 
of  asking  what  is  the  maximum  amount  that  any  rich  man  should 
be  permitted  at  death  to  divert  by  his  will  from  the  national  ex- 
chequer which  should  normally  be  the  heir  of  all  private  riches  in 
excess  of  a  quite  moderate  amount  by  way  of  family  provision." 
It  stands  for  a  special  capital  levy  to  pay  off  a  very  substantial  part 
of  the  entire  national  debt.^    It  stands,  in  fine,  for  taking  over  the 

*  When  the  issue  of  conscription  of  wealth  was  raised  by  labor  it  met 
with  a  striking  response  from  the  leader  of  the  Unionist  party.  Bonar 
Law,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  was  quoted  in  the  London  Times  of 
December  26,  1917,  as  saying :  "I  am  inclined  to  take  this  view  that  we 
ought  to  aim  at  making  this  burden  (of  national  debt)  one  which  will 
rest  practically  on  the  wealth  that  has  been  created  and  is  in  existence  at 
the  time  the  war  comes  to  an  end,  so  that  it  would  not  be  there  as  a 
handicap  on  the  creation  of  new  wealth  after  the  war.  1  he  question  of 
whether  or  not  there  should  be  conscription  of  wealth,  then,  is  entirely  a 
matter  of  expediency.  In  my  opinion,  it  is  simply  a  question  of  whether 
it  will  pay  them  [the  wealthy  classes]  best,  and  pay  the  country  best,  to 
have  a  general  capital  levy,  and  reduce  the  national  dtbt  as  far  as  you 
can,  or  have  it  continued  for  50  years  as  a  constant  burden  of  taxation. 
My  own  feeling  is  that  it  would  be  better,  both  for  the  wealthy  classes 
and  the  country,  to  have  this  levy  of  capital,  and  reduce  the  burden  of  the 
national  debt." 


136         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

national  surplus — whether  piled  up  in  the  past  or  created  currently 
— as  new  social  capital. 

Such  a  revolution  in  national  finance  v/ould  provoke  bitter  antag- 
onisms. Probably  no  other  single  plank  in  the  labor  platform  is 
so  hotly  disputed.  The  capitalistic  order  of  society  in  its  untram- 
meled  form  would  disappear  under  the  rigorous  applications  of  this 
new  "democratic  finance."  It  is  its  proposals  for  the  conscription  of 
wealth  which  distinguishes  the  labor  platform  most  clearly  from  the 
platform  of  the  Tory  state  socialists,  like  Lord  Milner,  the  Prussian- 
Australians,  like  Hughes,  and  the  old-line  Liberals,  like  Asquith. 

In  contrast  to  the  picture  of  Old  England  drawn  at  the  outset, 
the  British  workers'  document  put  the  vision  of  the  England  they 
were  fighting  for: 

In  the  disposal  of  the  surplus  above  the  standard  of  life  society 
has  hitherto  gone  as  far  wrong  as  in  its  neglect  to  secure  the  neces- 
sary basis  of  any  genuine  industrial  efficiency  or  decent  social  order. 
We  have  allowed  the  riches  of  our  mines,  the  rental  value  of  the 
lands  superior  to  the  margin  of  cultivation,  the  extra  profits  of  the 
fortunate  capitalists,  even  the  material  outcome  of  scientific  discov- 
eries— which  ought  by  now  to  have  made  this  Britain  of  ours  im- 
mune from  class  poverty  or  from  any  widespread  destitution — to  be 
absorbed  by  individual  proprietors;  and  then  devoted  very  largely 
to  the  senseless  luxury  of  an  idle  rich  class.  Against  this  misappro- 
priation of  the  wealth  of  the  community,  the  Labour  Party — speak- 
ing in  the  interests  not  of  the  wage-earners  alone,  but  of  every  grade 
and  section  of  producers  by  hand  or  by  brain,  not  to  mention  also 
those  of  the  generations  that  are  to  succeed  us,  and  of  the  perma- 
nent welfare  of  the  community — emphatically  protests.  One  main 
pillar  of  the  house  that  the  Labour  Party  intends  to  build  is  the 
future  appropriation  of  the  surplus,  not  to  the  enlargement  of  any 
individual  fortune,  but  to  the  common  good.  It  is  from  this  con- 
stantly arising  surplus  (to  be  secured,  on  the  one  hand,  by  nation- 
alization and  municipalization  and,  on  the  other,  by  the  steeply  grad- 
uated taxation  of  private  income  and  riches)  that  will  have  to  be 
found  the  new  capital  which  the  community  day  by  day  needs  for 
the  perpetual  improvement  and  increase  of  its  various  enterprises, 
for  which  we  shall  decline  to  be  dependent  on  the  usury-exacting 
financiers. 

It  is  from  the  same  source  that  has  to  be  defrayed  the  pub- 
lic provision  for  the  sick  and  infirm  of  all  kinds  (including  that 
for  maternity  and  infancy)  which  is  still  so  scandalously  insufficient; 
for  the  aged  and  those  prematurely  incapacitated  by  accident  or 
disease,  now  in  many  ways  so  imperfectly  cared  for,  for  the  educa- 
tion alike  of  children  of  adolescents  and  of  adults,  in  which  the 
Labour  Party  demands  a  genuine  equality  of  opportunity,  overcom- 
ing all  differences  of  material  circumstances;  and  for  the  organiza- 
tion of  public  improvements  of  all  kinds,  including  the  brightening 


LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER  137 

of  the  lives  of  those  now  condemned  to  almost  ceaseless  toil,  and  a 
great  development  of  the  means  of  recreation.  From  the  same  source 
must  come  the  greatly  increased  public  provision  that  the  Labour 
Party  will  insist  on  being  made  for  scientific  investigation  and  orig- 
inal research,  in  every  branch  of  knowledge,  not  to  say  also  for  the 
promotion  of  music,  literature  and  fine  art,  which  have  been  under 
capitalism  so  greatly  neglected,  and  upon  which,  so  the  Labour 
Party  holds,  any  real  development  of  civilization  fundamentally 
depends. 

Society,  like  the  individual,  does  not  live  by  bread  alone — does 
not  exist  only  for  perpetual  wealth  production.  It  is  in  the  pro- 
posal for  this  appropriation  of  every  surplus  for  the  Common  Good 
— in  the  vision  of  its  resolute  use  for  the  building  up  of  the  com- 
munity as  a  whole  instead  of  for  the  magnification  of  individual 
fortunes — that  the  Labour  Party,  as  the  Party  of  the  Producers 
by  hand  or  by  brain,  most  distinctively  marks  itself  off  from  the 
older  political  parties,  standing,  as  these  do,  essentially  for  the  main- 
tenance, unimpaired,  of  the  perpetual  private  mortgage  upon  the 
annual  product  of  the  nation  that  is  involved  in  the  individual  owner- 
ship of  land  and  capital. 


Of  course  many  of  these  proposals  were  not  new.  The  capital 
levy  was  more  startling,  but  land  reform,  workmen's  compensation, 
re-housing  and  the  like  were  pushed  by  Lloyd  George  and  Asquith 
piece-meal  under  the  old  liberal  regime;  the  war  had  written  unheard- 
of  tax  laws.  The  industrial  minimums  were  very  similar  to  those  of 
the  Progressive  Party  platform  six  years  before  in  the  United  States. 
Socialist  parties  in  a  score  of  countries  have  belabored  as  hard  or 
harder  the  infelicities  of  the  system  of  private  capitalism.  But 
here  we  had,  as  distinct  from  pre-war  liberal  procedure,  a  rounded 
program;  and  as  distinct  from  the  socialist  procedure,  one  on  which 
the  general  voter  was  asked  to  join,  not  on  the  basis  of  subscribing 
to  a  creed  but  on  the  basis  of  objective,  particular  measures. 

It  was,  however,  the  kick  behind  it  which  gave  the  Labour  Party 
program  its  hearing — the  realization  that  England  would  not  go 
back  to  the  old  loose-jointed  scheme  of  things  after  the  war,  that 
there  was  tremendous  industrial  unrest  throughout  the  Kingdom 
and  that  there  were  many  indications  that  the  soldiers  were  coming 
back  in  a  temper  to  join  forces  with  the  workers. 

Announcement  was  made  at  the  June  conference  that  the  Labour 
Party  would  contest  400  seats  for  the  next  Parliament.  As  the 
labor  leaders  saw  it,  they  were  confronted  with  something  more 
dynamic  than  a  contest  with  the  historic  English  parties — with  pros- 
pect of  nothing  less  than  a  new  political  formation  under  the  Premier. 
The  situation  was  summed  up  by  a  radical  labor  leader  in  this  way: 


138         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

Lloyd  George's  old  associates  in  the  labor  movement  mistrust 
him,  so  that  it  is  scarcely  likely  that  he  can  win  them  back  again 
as  his  followers.  He  has  no  temperamental  commonality  with  the 
Tories,  and  they  would  not  be  displeased  if  he  were  not  so  for- 
midable a  figure  in  domestic  affairs  after  the  war.  The  liberals 
accuse  him  of  treachery  to  Asquith  and  the  first  raters  among  them 
did  not  go  into  his  cabinet.  There  remains  his  personal  following 
and  when  you  realize  that  some  35,000  people  have  been  added  to 
the  newly  created  orders,  you  can  see  that  that  is  not  inconsiderable 
as  a  nucleus  for  a  new  party.  Lloyd  George  lacks  everything  just 
now  but  courage. 

— Courage,  yes,  and  a  widespread  public  conviction  that  however 
you  disagreed  with  him  or  his  colleagues,  he,  as  no  other  man  in 
England,  could  marshal  her  forces  against  Germany — if  the  war 
were  still  on;  the  prestige  of  the  great  war  leader — if  it  were  suc- 
cessfully ended;  the  backing,  in  either  case,  of  the  great  interests 
built  up  during  the  war,  the  suction-force  of  a  khaki  election,  and 
the  prowess  of  the  most  redoubtable  campaigner  the  English  radical 
movement  ever  produced.  No  mean  rival,  in  truth,  if  personality 
rather  than  platform  were  to  be  the  test. 

What  could  be  attempted  in  those  war  months  was  to  gauge  cer- 
tain of  the  currents  at  work  in  the  British  citizenship  which  would 
continue  regardless  of  the  outcome  of  the  then  anticipated  election 
and  which  would  tend,  during  a  period  of  years,  to  strengthen  rather 
than  weaken  the  labor  representation.  For  out  of  office,  only  less 
than  in,  the  influence  of  the  labor  movement  on  post-bellum  domestic 
and  foreign  policy  will  be  augmented  many-fold. 

With  respect  to  the  wage-earners  themselves,  we  have  seen  in  the 
more  active  partnership  of  the  British  Labour  Party  and  the  Trades 
Union  Congress  a  muster  of  organized  labor  which  in  numbers  and 
unity  exceeded  anything  in  the  past.  The  position  held  by  Clynes 
in  their  counsels  is  a  symbol  of  the  great  mass  of  unskilled  general 
workers  now  ranged  alongside  the  skilled  trades.  The  spread  of 
the  great  industrial  organizations,  such  as  the  miners,  embracing 
skilled  and  unskilled  alike,  is  a  response  to  the  same  forces,  and  in 
a  succeeding  chapter  we  shall  see  how  the  miners  have  in  the  course 
of  the  war  come  to  subscribe  to  state  ownership  of  industry  coupled 
with  workers'  participation  in  the  management.  Every  labor  con- 
ference of  19 1 8  bore  testimony  in  the  debates  from  the  floor  that 
the  socialists  of  the  right  (who  have  stood  for  a  strong  war  policy) 
had  not  swallowed  the  government's  home  policy.  If  anything, 
some  of  the  trade  unionists  of  the  right  were  in  their  savage  crit- 
icism of  the  government  and  their  radical  proposals  more  sweeping 
than  socialists  of  the  left. 


LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER  139 

THE  RETURNED  SOLDIERS 

With  respect  to  the  returned  soldiers,  the  point  of  view  of  not 
a  few  detached  observers  was  expressed  by  an  English  Y.  M.  C.  A. 
worker  in  London,  whose  work  brought  him  into  personal  relation- 
ship with  thousands  of  men  in  khaki.  He  cited  the  Premier's  famous 
remark  that  drink  was  a  worse  enemy  to  England  than  was  Germany, 
and  (in  spite  of  the  fact  that  many  of  the  conservative  labor  men 
had  advised  against  war  time  prohibition — lest  it  lead  to  a  divided 
counti-y),  he  reckoned  the  failure  of  the  ministry  to  act  at  all 
as  one  of  the  strong  counts  against  it.  He  felt  that  the  men  in 
the  ranks  hoped  that  they  would  come  back  to  a  changed  England, 
to  start  in  again  on  a  higher  plane  of  living  and  better  conditions. 
If  England  wasn't  changed,  then,  with  the  drag  of  trench  life, 
and  the  general  physical  and  mental  reaction  from  the  war,  they 
would  in  the  course  of  two  or  three  months  slip  back  into  the  old 
way  of  living. 

"Will  they  come  back  revolutionists?"  he  was  asked.  They 
had  been  through  this  mill  for  their  common  country.  When  they 
came  back  would  they  be  content  to  find  that  it  wasn't  common 
after  all;  that  men  who  had  borne  the  brunt  equally  came  back  to 
very  unequal  portions? 

They  would  not  be  revolutionists,  he  answered,  because  the 
English  are  the  greatest  grousing  nation  on  the  face  of  the  earth; 
they  all  talk  revolution,  but  nobody  revolves.  They  are  a  phleg- 
matic people.  But  under  it  all  the  soldiers  were  in  key  with  the 
working  class  feeling. 

"How  was  this?"  he  was  asked.  "Have  the  labor  unions  been 
allowed  to  carry  on  propaganda  among  the  soldiers  at  the  front?" 

"No,"  he  said.  "And  the  soldiers  know  that;  and  that  is  one 
of  the  reasons  why." 

"But  most  of  the  papers  talk  in  a  very  different  strain.  They 
don't  publish  things  from  the  labor  angle." 

"No,"  he  said,  "and  the  soldiers  know  that,  too,  and  that  is 
another  reason." 

The  labor  movement,  he  believed,  would  be  for  temperance,  not 
prohibition;  it  would  be  for  radical  changes  in  the  distribution  of 
wealth;  and  the  soldiers  would  be  with  the  workers.  More  espe- 
cially, they  would  be  for  having  a  say  and  a  big  say  in  the  gov- 
ernment. England  had  been  governed  by  squires  and  the  propertied 
classes.  The  contention  had  been  that  the  man  who  did  not  own 
land,  did  not  have  a  stake  in  the  country,  and  should  not  have  the 
say.  Now  the  soldiers  would  come  back  at  them.  "Because  you 
hold  the  land  your  grandfather  got,"  they  would  put  it,  "you  say 


140        THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

you  have  a  stake  in  the  country.  Well,  we've  been  through  this 
hell  for  four  years,  and  that  gives  us  a  stake,  and  we  are  going  to 
use  it." 

There  was  a  new  spirit  among  the  conservative  classes,  too,  he 
concluded.  The  younger  men  had  been  out  at  the  war  and  knew 
the  Tommies;  and  the  Tommies  knew  them.  They  had  a  feeling 
toward  each  other  which  would  be  a  great  tempering  influence.  But 
it  would  not  stand  in  the  way  of  the  soldiers  taking  things  into 
their  own  hands,  and  setting  about  a  mighty  shift  in  the  scheme  of 
English  life  after  the  war. 

Which  is  putting  in  another  way  the  point  of  the  English  fight- 
ing man  returned  from  the  Boer  war,  as  Kipling  wrote  it  down: 

An'   I'm  rollin'  'is   lawns   for  the   Squire, 

Me! 

THE   WOMEN    WORKERS 

Along  with  its  appeal  to  the  soldiers  and  workers,  through  special 
legislation  and  through  its  program  for  the  democratization  of 
wealth,  the  Labour  Party  set  out  to  reach  the  new  women  workers. 
And  the  hundreds  of  thousands  of  old  unionists  in  the  army  are 
matched  by  tens  of  thousands  of  new  unionists  among  the  hundreds 
of  thousands  of  new  wage-earning  women.^ 

In  19 1 8,  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  elected  Margaret 
Bondfield  to  membership  on  its  parliamentary  committee — a  status 
hitherto  unaccorded  an  English  woman  and  one  not  yet  paralleled 
in  America.  Slight,  dark,  deft  and  direct  in  speech.  Miss  Bondfield 
is  a  foil,  physically,  to  another  leader  of  English  women  unionists, 
better  known  in  the  United  States.  Tall,  blonde,  vehement,  Mary 
Macarthur  (Mrs.  W.  C.  Anderson)  stands  out  a  colorful  figure 
from  the  cornice  of  the  lions  in  a  mass  meeting  in  Trafalgar  Square 
or  among  a  knot  of  working  girls  in  an  industrial  town.  Miss  Bond- 
field  is  a  member  of  the  executive  of  the  Independent  Labour  Party, 
but  it  is  for  her  rise  from  the  ranks  as  an  organizer,  her  self-schooled 
grasp  of  underlying  issues,  her  radical  social  insight  and  her  tactical 
skill  that  she  is  known  in  the  labor  movement — qualities  which  do 
not  in  themselves  convey  any  hint  of  the  charm  of  her  face  and  per- 
sonality, or  of  that  unfagged  energy  of  a  girl  ambulance  driver 
which  is  hers. 

In  interpreting  the  woman's  movement  in  industry.  Miss  Bond- 
field  divided  in  into  three  parts — distributive,  industrial  and  political. 

*Mary  Macarthur  estimated  in  1918  that,  of  the  4,500,000  wage  earning 
women  in  commerce  and  industry  in  Great  Britain,  750,000  were  enrolled 
in  trade  unions. 


LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER  141 

The  women's  part  in  the  distributive  field  dates  back  to  the 
early  stages  of  the  cooperative  movement.  The  only  quaUfication 
for  membership  in  its  woman's  guilds  is  to  be  a  member  of  a  co- 
operative society.  Often  a  president  is  a  middle  class  woman,  but 
for  the  most  part  they  are  working  women.  They  have  been  a 
real  leaven  in  the  cooperative  movement — forward-looking,  keeping 
it  abreast  of  the  times  in  political  aims,  sane  on  the  war,  and  the 
push  behind  the  agitation  for  maternity-care  in  Great  Britain.  While 
there  are  only  a  few  leaders  whose  names  are  known  the 
country  over,  there  are  hundreds  of  first  rate  women  who  are  strong 
in  their  districts,  and  who  are  turned  to  whenever  the  progressive 
group  in  a  community  are  looking,  for  example,  for  a  woman  mem- 
ber on  a  board  of  guardians  or  local  council. 

The  Woman's  Trade  Union  League  dates  back  even  further — 
to  the  early  '70's,  and  carries  us  to  a  little  known  chapter  in  the 
woman's  movement  in  the  United  States.  Susan  B.  Anthony  and 
Lucy  Larcom  were  interested  in  the  organization  of  working  women. 
Miss  Anthony,  to  be  sure,  was  a  pioneer  in  woman's  rights,  rather 
than  in  economic  reform.  She  approached  the  question  from  a 
middle  class  rather  than  a  labor  point  of  view.  She  was  interested 
in  getting  an  opportunity  for  women  to  be  self-supporting  and 
did  not  meet  the  position  of  the  unions  by  standing  out  for  equal 
wages.  They  regarded  her  efforts  as  playing  into  the  hands  of  the 
employers  and  the  movement  in  America  did  not  last.  But  an  Eng- 
lish woman,  Miss  Patterson,  who  visited  America,  saw  the  organized 
groups  of  umbrella  v/orkers  and  type  setters,  returned  to  England 
and  started  the  Woman's  Trade  Union  League,  which,  in  the  course 
of  years,  as  a  piece  of  international  reciprocity,  became  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  corresponding  American  league.  Since  the  outbreak  of 
the  war,  the  British  movement  has  grown  with  great  rapidity.  Mary 
Macarthur  is  secretary.  It  is  a  federation  which  looks  after  legis- 
lation affecting  women  workers,  and  does  general  propaganda.  The 
men's  unions  are,  many  of  them,  organizing  women,  but  do  not 
always  need  a  full  time  organizer.  The  league  serves  them  as  well 
as  carries  on  its  own  organizing  work. 

It  found  numerous  cases  where  no  existing  labor  organization 
would  claim  or  want  women  doing  particular  occupations.  There 
were  not  enough  of  them  to  organize  into  separate  unions,  and  the 
men  did  not  want  them  in.  This  led  to  the  organization  of  the 
National  Federation  of  Working  Women,  not  a  federation  but  a 
union  affiliated  to  the  league  like  the  other  women's  unions.  Miss 
Macarthur  is  honorary  secretary;  Miss  Bondfield,  general  organ- 
izer. This  union  has  more  than  three  times  the  members  it  had 
at  the  outset  of  the  war.    It  organized  many  of  the  women  in  the 


142         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

munitions  trades,  although  only  a  fraction  of  the  great  number 
who  swelled  the  industry.  Its  general  position  is  to  claim  equal  pay 
for  equal  work,  and  it  has  the  very  great  advantage  that  it  is  in 
touch  with  the  men's  skilled  trades.  This  has  given  it  standing  at 
a  time  when  other  labor  bodies  have  been  bidding  for  membership. 

The  Workers'  Union  is  one  of  the  organizations  of  unskilled 
and  semi-skilled,  representative  of  several.  It  will  take  in  any 
worker,  man  or  woman;  but  its  members  and  organizers  are  familiar 
only  with  the  rates  and  standards  of  the  lower  grades.  Thus,  in 
one  district,  women  were  introduced  as  crane  operators  and  the 
Workers'  Union,  appearing  before  the  munitions  arbitration  tribunal, 
asked  for  and  got  only  thirty-two  shillings  a  week — the  unskilled 
rate.  A  short  time  later,  the  federation  took  up  similar  cases,  main- 
tained this  was  skilled  work  and  got  the  full  rate  of  fifty-two  shil- 
hngs. 

So  the  federation  includes  skilled  operators  getting  £6  to  £7  a 
week  at  piece  rates — women  taken  in  to  fill  men's  places — and  girls 
who  came  under  the  munitions  wage  act  and  who  may  get  scarcely 
more  than  double  that  number  of  shillings.  It  is  to  a  degree  an 
anomalous  organization,  but  full  of  potentialities,  and  has  certain 
advantages  when  the  whole  trade  union  movement  is  in  the  boiling 
pot,  and  in  every  branch  and  local  there  is  discussion  of  how  to 
reorganize  the  union  movement  .0  m^eet  the  situation  after  the  war. 
As  certain  women  leaders  see  it,  the  conflict  in  post-bellum  days, 
growing  out  of  "dilution,"  will  be  between  the  skilled  and  the  un- 
skilled, who  have  been  brought  in;  as  others  see  it  the  conflict  will 
be  primarily  along  sex  lines  unless  trade  board  acts,  factory  regula- 
tions and  national  minimums  lift  unskilled  women  workers  to  the 
same  level  as  that  of  unskilled  men. 

This  steady  work  of  organization,  which  is  bringing  greater  and 
greater  numbers  of  women  wage-earners  into  touch  with  the  organ- 
ized labor  movement,  is  supplemented  by  a  political  evangel.  The 
Labour  Party  elected  four  women  to  its  executive  in  June.  A 
woman  officer  and  two  national  women  organizers  were  appointed 
to  assist  constituent  organizations.  The  Women's  Labour  League 
agreed  to  a  procedure  at  the  Nottingham  Conference  by  which  it 
was  thereafter  to  assist  in  the  formation  of  women's  sections  of  the 
local  labor  parties,  and  its  journal.  Labour  Women,  was  taken  over 
by  the  party.  Through  discussion,  classes  for  organizers,  and  dis- 
trict conferences  of  women's  sections,  a  general  missionary  work 
among  the  new  voters  was  instituted.  The  relations  of  the  Labour 
Party  to  the  general  suffrage  movement  is  indicated  by  the  follow- 
ing resolution  adopted  by  the  annual  council  (19 18)  of  the  Na- 
tional Union  of  Women's  Suffrage  Societies: 


LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER  143 

That  on  the  occasion  of  the  passing  of  the  Representation  of 
the  People  Bill  into  law,  this  Council  of  the  National  Union  of 
Women's  Suffrage  Societies,  desires  to  send  a  message  of  hearty 
thanks  to  the  Labour  Party  for  their  steady  and  consistent  support 
of  the  Cause  of  Women's  Suffrage  in  times  past,  and  assures  them 
of  the  firm  intention  of  the  N.  U.  W.  S.  to  continue  to  work  for  the 
further  enfranchisement  of  women  on  the  same  terms  as  it  is  or 
may  be  granted  to  men. 

Similarly,  the  Labour  Party  set  about  enlisting  not  only  indi- 
viduals but  groups  hitherto  outside  the  labor  movement.  Follow- 
ing the  change  in  the  constitution  in  February,  it  received  applica- 
tions from  organizations  which  could  not  be  classed  as  either  trade 
union  or  socialist  societies,  and  in  June  the  executive  asked  for 
discretionary  power  to  affiliate  them.  They  ranged  from  political 
and  propagandist  bodies  to  professional  associations  catering  to 
various  sections  of  government  employees,  such  as  manual  training 
teachers,  uncertificated  assistant  teachers,  and  various  clerical 
groups. 

The  full  muster  of  the  rapidly  swelling  ranks  of  trade  unionism, 
vast  reaches  of  unskilled  workers  hitherto  unorganized,  the  civilian 
army,  the  wage-earning  women,  the  women  of  the  working  class, 
professional  groups — these  then,  and  large  numbers  of  the  general 
population,  labor  is  out  to  enlist.  How  far  it  is  able  to  swing 
not  only  the  wage  earners  as  a  body  but  outside  groups,  depends 
not  alone  on  its  program.  Obviously  the  tendency  will  be  for  the 
older  parties  to  match  it  on  m.any  of  its  points,  and  the  Labour 
Party  in  turn  to  outflank  them  by  further  and  more  radical  pro- 
posals. Rather,  the  question  will  be,  hov/  far  vast  numbers  of  the 
population  come  to  feel  that  it  is  only  through  the  Labour  Party 
that  they  can  secure  accomplishment.  Here  the  experience  of  the 
cooperative  movement  is  significant. 

THE    COOPERATORS 

The  government  clearly  added  to  labor's  voting  strength  by  sub- 
jecting the  dividends  of  the  Co-operative  Societies  to  the  excess 
profits  tax,  and  by  repeated  attempts  to  bring  Co-operative  dividends 
within  the  scope  of  the  income  tax.  As  a  result,  the  Co-operative 
Wholesale  Society  and  the  Co-operative  Union,  representing  three 
and  one-half  million  members,  within  the  year,  allied  themselves  for 
political  action  with  the  Labour  Party. 

The  first  food  controller  was  Lord  Davenport,  a  wholesale  grocer, 
and  to  him  the  cooperatives  attributed  the  attempt  to  apply  the 
V7ar  profits  tax  to  the  annual  surpluses  of  the  cooperatives.     No 


144        THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

doubt  there  were  those  in  the  government  who  regarded  these  as 
merely  a  likely  source  of  revenue.  But  the  cooperatives  are  not 
organized  for  profit.  They  distribute  their  surpluses  among  their 
members,  largely  working  people,  in  order  to  cut  down  their  cost  of 
living  and  eliminate  the  very  profit  taking  which  the  government 
tried  to  scoop  in.  It  was  an  easy  matter  for  them  to  meet  the  raid 
by  simply  reducing  the  prices  to  their  members,  and  show  no  profits 
at  the  end  of  the  year  that  could  fall  in  the  government's  hopper; 
which  they  did.  But  the  cooperatives  felt  that  the  whole  thing  was 
a  put-up  job  of  the  competing  commercial  interests  to  cripple  them. 
Lloyd  George's  backing  of  the  taxation  scheme  identified  him  with 
the  move.  The  cooperatives  washed  their  hands  of  the  Liberal  party, 
with  which  they  had  in  the  past  been  historically  a  clientele,  and 
announced  that,  in  order  to  protect  their  rights  in  the  future  and 
no  less  project  the  principle  of  cooperation  in  the  period  of  recon- 
struction, they  would  enter  politics  as  an  organized  body,  run  candi- 
dates for  Parliament  in  certain  districts  at  the  next  election,  and 
work  with  the  working  class  political  movement.  At  the  October, 
19 1 7,  conference  of  cooperators,  it  was  agreed  that  the  aims  were 
closer  unity  between  the  cooperative  and  the  trade  union  movements, 
working-class  funds  to  be  used  for  working-class  ideals,  the  cooper- 
ative societies  to  be  the  food  stores  for  trade  unionists  who  downed 
tools  at  strike  time.  W.  H.  Watkins,  the  Plymouth  cooperator, 
said: 

There  are  twenty  millions  directly  associated  with  the  two  move- 
ments— cooperation  and  trade  unionism. 

Arthur  Henderson,  speaking  to  the  cooperators  at  this  confer- 
ence, said: 

One  point  on  which  we  all  should  be  determined  is  that  when  this 
war  is  terminated  we  shall  see  that  the  "have  nets"  receive  a  greater 
opportunity.  We  should  take  steps  to  lessen  the  number  of  sections 
into  which  democracy  has  been  divided.  I  shall  be  prepared  that 
the  Labour  Party  as  now  known  should  cease  to  exist,  if  by  so 
doing  we  could  combine  the  whole  of  the  democracy  into  a  great 
people's  party. 

The  conference  unanimously  adopted  a  draft  scheme  for  coop- 
erative parliamentary  and  municipal  representation,  and  a  resolu- 
tion of  policy  was  also  unanimously  carried,  declaring  the  desire  of 
the  conference  to  mark  its  entrance  into  the  political  arena  with  a 
definite  expression  of  general  policy  of  industrial,  social,  and  eco- 
nomic reform,  which  included  the  following  aims: 


LABOR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER  145 

to  safeguard  the  interests  of  voluntary  cooperation ; 

to  resist  legislative  or  administrative  inequality  so  that,  eventu- 
ally, the  processes  of  production,  distribution,  and  exchange  shall  be 
directed  to  the  state; 

to  eliminate  the  profiteers  or  private  and  other  speculators; 

to  secure  compulsory  housing  of  the  people; 

to  recast  the  system  of  education  on  national  lines,  affording 
equal  opportunity  for  the  higher  education  of  all ; 

to  effect  Parliamentary  control  of  foreign  policy; 

to  break  down  caste  and  class  systems; 

to  democratize  state  services; 

to  abolish  taxes  on  foodstuffs; 

to  develop  agriculture; 

to  establish  a  national  credit  bank  to  facilitate  the  development 
of  trade; 

to  gradually  demobilize  soldiers  and  sailors  from  the  army  and 
navy  corresponding  with  the  needs  of  employment. 

A  Joint  Committee  was  later  formed,  consisting  of  representatives 
of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  Co-operative  Congress,  the 
Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  Trades  Union  Congress,  and  the 
Labour  Party  Executive. 

So  we  have  the  Trades  Union  Congress,  with  four  million  mem- 
bers, the  British  Labour  Party  with  over  two  and  one-half  million 
members,  and  the  Co-operatives  with  three  and  one-half  million 
members,  compacted  for  political  action. 

Since  each  member  of  the  latter  represents  a  family  group 
(though  the  three  organizations  draw  on  the  same  famihes  for  the 
most  part),  this  may  well  mean  that  two-fifths  of  the  people  of 
Great  Britain  and  Ireland  by  mid-1918  were  beginning  to  unite  for 
political  action.  Such  a  process  of  social  integration  is  gradual. 
The  war  unquestionably  speeded  it  up — so  much  so  as  to  give  rise 
to  prophesies  of  early  success  In  terms  of  Parliamentary  seats  as 
numerous  as  seats  contested.  On  the  contrary,  Alfred  Zimmern  of 
the  Workers'  Educational  Association  believes  that  the  war  caught 
labor  twenty  years  ahead  of  its  time  of  coming  to  power.  Robert 
Smillie,  head  of  the  Miners,  has  stated  that  he  looks  for  a  labor 
government  in  ten  years. 

The  engineer  of  this  new  alliance,  with  its  invitation  to  an  incal- 
culable general  following  in  the  electorate,  is  the  British  Labour 
Party,  the  foundations  of  which,  as  we  have  seen,  rest  in  trade 
unionism.  It  stands,  four-square,  against  inequality  of  circum- 
stance and  opportunity.  It  fights  against  unbridled  competition. 
It  aims  at  cooperation.  It  plans  to  establish  a  standard  of  living. 
It  advocates  self-government  in  industry.  Its  main  concern  is 
with  the  distribution  of  the  national  wealth.     It  will  interfere  in- 


146         THE  ENGLAND  THEY  ARE  FIGHTING  FOR 

creaslngly  with  the  present  unequal  distribution  of  the  community's 
production.  It  is  committed  to  a  policy  of  collectivism.  The  pro- 
tectionists, the  imperialists,  the  reactionaries,  the  idle  rich,  the 
great  landlords,  do  well  to  fear  the  rising  power  of  the  British 
Labour  Party,  for  it  is  determined  to  construct  a  new  social  order. 
It  has  outgrown  tinkering  and  patch-work,  welfare  devices  and  tepid 
social  reforms.  It  has  outlived  an  era  of  gentle  compromises  with 
Liberal  industrialists.  It  has  the  flame  of  a  new  vision  of  life  and 
labor,  and  it  has  the  scientific  method  which  the  gathered  and  social- 
ized intelligence  of  many  workers  by  hand  and  brain  has  brought 
to   its   reconstruction   program. 

Briefly,  the  aims  which  gave  it  rebirth  in  1918  were:  to  win  the 
war,  to  establish  a  working-class  diplomacy  and  a  democratic  peace, 
to  become  a  national  party  and  so  to  become  the  government,  and 
to  found  a  new  England. 

With  these  aims,  it  makes  its  appeal  to  the  workers,  the  soldiers, 
the  commoners  of  our  day.  Kipling  perhaps  wove  a  greater  proph- 
ecy than  he  wot  in  his  lines  on  "The  Return"  twenty  years  ago: 

Peace  is  declared,  an'  I  return 

To  'Ackneystadt,  but  not  the  same; 
Things  'ave  transpired  which  made  me  learri 

The  size  and  meanin'  of  the  game. 
I  did  no  more  than  others  did, 

1  don't  know  where  the  change  began; 
I  started  as  a  average  kid, 

I  finished  as  a  thinkin'  man. 
If  England  was  what  England  seems 

An'  not  the  England  of  our  dreams, 
But  only  putty,  brass,  an'  paint, 

'Ow  quick  we'd  drop  'er!    But  she  ain't! 


PART  VI 
CONCLUSION 


CHAPTER  XIV 

THE  SHOP  STEWARDS  AND  THEIR  SIGNIFICANCE 

The  swing  toward  the  left  in  British  labor,  which  we  have  followed 
in  its  organized  front  in  foreign  and  domestic  politics,  showed  itself 
still  earlier  in  the  economic  field  in  the  new  movements  for  workers' 
controL 

We  have  long  had  outreachings  toward  democracy  in  indus- 
try in  the  thrust  of  craft  unionism,  in  the  socialist  movement  for 
state  ownership  of  the  means  of  production,  in  the  more  recent 
syndicalist  movement  for  producer's  ownership.  But  there  is  some- 
thing at  work  in  England  which  can  be  differentiated  from  all  three. 
It  is  manifesting  itself  spontaneously  in  the  insurgency  of  the  shop- 
stewards.  It  is  manifesting  itself  organically  in  the  rise  of  indus- 
trial unionism.  It  is  manifesting  itself  deliberately  in  the  recom- 
mendations by  the  Whitley  Committee  for  industrial  councils  which 
have  been  adopted  by  the  British  government  as  the  basis  for  its 
policy  for  industrial  reconstruction;  and  deliberately,  also,  in  the 
plans  of  far-sighted  employers  and  the  propaganda  of  the  guild- 
socialists.  These  manifestations  will  in  turn  be  the  subjects  of 
this  and  two  succeeding  chapters. 

The  rise  of  the  shop  stewards  is  laid  in  the  engineering  trades 
— the  machinists,  as  we  know  them  in  America;  the  munition- 
makers,  as  the  war  cast  them  in  a  new  role.  In  that  new  role,  the 
women  workers  have  been  their  understudies;  and  the  fortunes  of 
the  two  are,  willy  nilly,  bound  up  together. 

Yet,  in  a  sense,  the  shop  steward  is  offspring  of  the  ''father"  (or 
as  we  call  him,  chairman)  of  the  printers'  chapel,  an  institution 
older  than  unionism  itself.  By  usage  dating  back  to  Caxton's  time, 
the  oldest  journeyman  printer  has  represented  his  fellows  in  taking 
up  things  with  the  management. 

At  various  stages  in  British  industrial  history,  rough  and  ready 
shop  leaders  have  played  their  part.  Before  the  war,  the  Amal- 
gamated Society  of  Engineers  (A.  S.  E.)  had  established  stewards 
in  various  plants.  They  were  the  men  who  looked  out  for  the  inter- 
ests of  the  union  in  the  particular  shop.  They  would  ask  a  new 
man  to  show  his  union  card  and,  if  he  had  none  and  refused  to  join, 
then  it  would  be  made  uncomfortable  for  him  by  the  other  union- 

149 


ISO  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

ists.  The  shop  stewards  would  get  together  temporary  shop  com- 
mittees to  take  up  some  plant  grievance  with  the  employer.  The 
shop  stewards  were  often  fired  offhand  by  the  management  if  they 
were  found  out.  While  they  were  unremunerated  save  for  perhaps 
a  few  shillings  a  quarter  for  turning  in  their  reports,  and  v^hile  they 
stood  a  chance  of  dismissal,  the  prestige  of  their  position  and  their 
fidelity  to  the  union  made  it  characteristic  of  the  stewards  that  they 
were  usually  the  most  responsible,  biggest-calibered  men  about  the 
works.  Finally,  the  practice  reached  a  stage  when  the  A.  S.  E. 
undertook  to  guarantee  these  men  their  wages  for  a  year,  or  until 
they  found  employment  elsewhere,  if  they  were  discharged  for  union 
activity.  This  led  to  the  spread  of  the  movement  and  under  war 
conditions  it  went  ahead  even  more  rapidly. 

There  were  several  causes  for  this.  As  we  shall  see,  the  first 
year  of  the  war  the  national  unions  (miners  excepted)  agreed  not 
to  strike  and  they  agreed  to  waive  all  the  trade  union  restrictions  and 
regulations  which  for  a  generation  had  been  built  up  to  safeguard 
the  status  and  income  of  skilled  men.  The  effect  of  the  agreement 
v/as  to  scrap  old  machines,  introduce  speeding  up  and  dilute  the 
labor  force  in  the  war  trades  with  unskilled  and  semi-skilled  men, 
women  and  youths.  The  effect  was,  also,  to  shelve  the  old  negotiat- 
ing and  conciliating  machinery  between  employers  and  employees 
just  at  the  time  that  the  abandonment  of  the  rules  and  regulations 
and  the  influx  of  "dilutes"  made  local  issues  more  real. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  these  issues  had  thus,  in  war  time,  to 
be  settled,  not  by  bargaining,  but  by  decision  of  the  arbitration 
boards  under  the  munitions  act,  the  district  trade  union  committees 
tended  to  side-step  them  and  pass  them  up  to  the  nationals,  and  the 
nationals  to  pass  them  on  to  the  government  tribunals.  Moreover, 
under  the  war  conditions,  the  new  workers  sought  representation  and 
a  chance  to  count.  The  result  was  the  growth  of  shop  stewardism 
as  a  spontaneous  groping  after  local  remedy.  It  has  taken  many 
forms — sometimes  the  selection  of  a  single  steward  for  all  crafts  and 
all  grades  of  skill  as  the  representative  of  the  men  of  a  plant  in 
meeting  with  their  employers;  sometimes  the  getting  together  of 
several  stewards  in  a  large  plant;  sometimes  the  getting  together  of 
the  shop  stewards  of  one  district  in  a  common  committee  for  joint 
action.  This  brought  them  at  various  times  and  places  into  conflict 
with  district  committees,  with  the  national  unions,  with  the  em- 
ployers and  with  the  government;  conflicts  which  spread  rather  than 
confined  the  movement;  conflicts  which  brought  them  individual  set- 
backs only  to  break  the  way  for  newer  and  further  incarnations  of 
the  same  active  principle  elsewhere. 

To  understand  these  outcroppings  of  self-assertion  at  a  hundred 


SHOP  STEWARDS  AND  THEIR  SIGNIFICANCE      151 

points — which  can  be  compared  only  to  a  new  rough  and  ready 
local  leadership  breaking  through  the  crusts  of  a  stale  political 
regime— such  as  the  overthrow  of  the  Whigs  by  the  headstrong 
Jackson  Democrats  in  the  20's — it  is  necessary  to  retrace  some  of 
the  developments  of  the  last  four  years,  more  in  detail.  It  must  be 
borne  in  mind,  in  doing  so,  that  the  war  did  not  create  English 
industrial  unrest.  It  merely  speeded  it  up  along  with  output.  In 
1913,  Great  Britain  had  1,497  strikes  and  lockouts,  involving  688,- 
925  workpeople,  and  a  duration  in  working  days  of  11,630,732.  la 
coal-mining  200,000  persons  were  involved,  in  engineering  50,000. 
The  war  intensified  the  causes  of  dispute,  and  in  1917,  267,000 
miners  were  involved,  and  316,000  engineering  workers. 

Modern  big-scale  standardized  industry  had  long  before  the  war 
outgrown  its  checks  and  controls,  and  was  seeking  others  which 
would  permit  it  to  function  productively,  smoothly  and  justly.  It 
was  seeking  a  government  of  its  own,  autocratic  or  self-governing, 
according  as  you  focussed  attention  on  the  big  managers  or  on  stir- 
rings in  rank  and  file.  When  the  war  need  came  to  produce  stand- 
ardized goods  swiftly,  in  immense  quantities,  the  directorate  and 
the  workers  could  not  operate  under  the  old  constitution. 

The  power-driven  machine  tool  had  entered  industry.  An  auto- 
matic machine  is  "a  machine  which,  after  the  job  has  been  fixed, 
requires  no  hand  adjustment."  Specialized  work  is  done  by  such 
machines,  one  person  forging  nuts,  another  superintending  their 
tapping,  a  third  turning  their  ends,  a  fourth  shaping  their  sides, 
another  hardening  them,  a  sixth  polishing  them..  This  means,  car- 
ried over  a  period  of  years,  that  unskilled  and  semi-skilled  labor 
takes  over  the  process  from  the  skilled  worker,  who  is  used  only 
to  set  up  the  machine.  It  means  that  women  and  children  supplant 
the  adult  male.^ 

THE    LOST    SAFEGUARDS 

Before  the  war  the  introduction  of  low-paid  women  as  machine 
tenders  had  made  for  simmering  trouble  in  the  engineering  trades. 
With  the  half  million  of  women  entering  these  trades  (which  are  the 
munition  trades)  under  the  demands  of  war,  the  trouble  boiled  up. 
In  the  autumn  of  19 14,  a  great  armament  firm  put  in  women  on 
shell-making,  with  a  wage-reduction  of  50  per  cent  from  the  stand- 
ard rate  of  men.  An  agreement  was  reached  between  the  Employers' 
Federation  and  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Engineers,  restricting 
female  labor  to  purely  automatic  operations.  The  men  thus  con- 
ceded the  right  of  women  to  take  part  in  the  process  of  shell-making, 

*  "Women  in  the  Engineering  Trades,"  by  Barbara  Drake. 


152  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

but  the  firm  did  not  make  the  corresponding  concession  of  maintain- 
ing the  wage-scale. 

In  February,  1915,  the  Government  Committee  on  Production  in 
Engineering  and  Shipbuilding  proposed  the  Shells  and  Fuses  Agree- 
ment, which  was  accepted  by  the  employers  and  the  trade  unions. 
It  admitted  female  labor  to  "operations  on  which  skilled  men  are 
at  present  employed."  The  employers  agreed  to  pay  "the  usual 
rates  of  the  district  for  the  operations  performed."  But  they  agreed 
to  pay  them  to  women  taking  the  place  of  skilled  men.  Shell  and 
fuse  making  are  largely  semi-skilled  trades.  The  Employers'  Fed- 
eration issued  a  note  to  its  members:  "Female  labor  undertaking 
the  work  of  semi-skilled  or  skilled  men  shall  be  paid  the  recognized 
employers  sent  a  letter  to  the  trade  unions  saying:  "Female  labor 
undertaking  the  work  of  semi-skilled  and  unskilled  men  shall  be 
paid  the  recognized  rates  of  the  district  for  female  labor  on  the 
operations  in  question." 

This  meant  that  the  women,  entering  engineering  and  "diluting" 
the  labor  supply,  were  to  receive  a  wage  of  about  five  cents  an 
hour,  and  thus  undercut  the  standard  of  livelihood  which  the  Amal- 
gamated Society  of  Engineers  had  been  building  up  since  1851. 

The  A.  S.  E.  replied:  "Female  labor  undertaking  the  work  of 
semi-skilled  or  unskilled  men  must  receive  the  rates  paid  to  the  men 
they  displace," 

Too  late.  The  union  should  have  remembered  earlier  the  semi- 
skilled character  of  the  work,  and  not  have  permitted  the  employers 
to  catch  them  napping  with  the  word  "skilled."  The  officials  of  the 
A.  S.  E.  never  again  caught  up  with  the  situation.  Multitudes  of 
women  were  poured  into  the  engineering  trades  at  a  low  wage  scale. 
The  rank  and  file  members  of  the  union  remembered  from  this 
moment  on  that  their  officials  (the  executive  committee  and  the  dis- 
trict committees)  had  failed  to  protect  them  at  this  time  of  crisis. 
From  this  time  on,  the  rank  and  file  looked  to  themselves,  and 
not  to  their  officials,  for  protective  action  against  what  they  believed 
to  be  profiteering  employers.  The  labor  troubles  of  the  Clyde,  Cov- 
entry, and  elsewhere,  with  the  shop  stewards  leading  them,  began 
when  the  employers  contrived  to  let  the  old  labor  leadership  throw 
down  its  outer  defenses  by  admitting  women  to  the  munition  proc- 
esses, and  at  the  same  time  refused  to  safeguard  the  wage  scale.^ 

On  February  8,  191 5,  H.  J.  Tennant,  who  had  been  Under- 
Secretary  of  State  for  War,  representing  the  government,  summoned 
the  labor  leaders  to  organize  the  forces  of  labor,  thus  confessing 

*See  "British  Industrial  Experience  During  the  War,"  Part  III,  by 
W.  Jett  Lauck.     Senate  Document  No.  114. 


SHOP  STEWARDS  AND  THEIR  SIGNIFICANCE      153 

the  inability  of  the  state  and  of  the  employers  to  conduct  industry 
without  a  new  partner  in  the  control.  This  new  partner  was  the 
trade  union.  This  act  of  the  government  made  the  joint  committee 
of  men  and  masters  a  board  of  continuous  mediation,  conciliation 
and  consultation.  It  conceded  the  husk  of  democratic  control  of 
industry,  but  what  of  the  kernel? 

Lloyd  George  was  at  this  point  in  his  varied  career  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer.  In  March,  19 15,  he  called  a  conference  at  the 
Treasury  of  7,7,  leading  trade  unions.  He  and  they  drew  up  the 
Treasury  Agreement.  Stoppages  of  work  were  to  cease;  arbitration 
was  to  take  the  place  of  strikes  and  lockouts.  The  trade  unions 
were  to  favor  "such  changes  in  working  conditions  or  trade  cus- 
toms as  may  be  necessary  with  a  view  to  accelerating  the  output 
of  war  munitions  or  equipments." 

The  following  were  the  principal  features  of  this  agreement:  ^ 

(i)  The  Minister  of  Munitions  received  power  to  control  factories 
engaged  principally  on  the  manufacture  of  munitions.  The  control 
of  these  factories  amounted  to  a  right  of  the  Minister  of  Munitions 
to  take  the  plant  over  altogether  from  the  owners.  That  right  has 
been  rarely  exercised  and  exercised  only  when  the  management 
failed  to  comply  with  the  requirements  of  the  government.  Such 
cases  have  been  very  exceptional,  probably  only  two  or  three  in 
number.  As  part  of  his  powers  in  regard  to  these  factories  (and 
this  actually  became  law)  the  Minister  of  Munitions  had  definite 
authority  to  limit  the  profits  of  such  plants.  The  profits  were  lim- 
ited to  an  increase  of  one-fifth  over  an  average  of  the  profits  of 
the  three  years  preceding. 

(2)  The  trade  unions  agreed  that,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  a 
definite  limitation  had  been  put  on  profits,  the  wages  of  the  employees 
should  be  fixed  at  the  rates  which  existed  at  that  time.  There  was 
to  be  no  fluctuation  upwards  or  downwards  in  the  wages  except  by 
consent  of  the  Minister  of  Munitions.  It  was  agreed  that  neither 
capital  nor  labor  should  make  a  profit  out  of  the  nation's  needs.  The 
government,  having  fixed  wages,  appreciated  that  it  became  its  duty 
to  see  that  the  labor  so  dealt  with  should  not  suffer  from  the  in- 
creased cost  of  living.  It  set  up  a  Committee  on  Production.  One 
of  the  duties  of  this  committee  consisted  in  hearing  evidence  as  to 
the  increased  cost  of  living  three  times  every  year.  Evidence  was 
brought  before  it  by  trade  unions'  officials,  or  any  one  concerned, 
and  the  committee  had  all  the  government  statistics  in  regard  to 
the  increased  cost  of  the  necessities  of  life.  Assuming  that  the 
living  costs  had  gone  up,  the  committee  then  made  (in  the  nature  of 
a  war  bonus)  a  national  award  to  all  employees  on  war  work, 
payable  by  the  employer,  but  to  be  recovered  from  the  government. 

*  Report  of  the  Special  Commission  from  the  British  Ministry  of  Muni- 
tions. 


154  WORKERS'  CONTRQL 

(3)  Strikes  and  lockouts  became  illegal  and  arbitration  became 
compulsory.  It  was  agreed  that  any  trade  disputes  in  war  industries 
should,  for  the  period  of  the  war,  be  submitted  compulsorily  to  arbi- 
tration, which  the  government  should  arrange.  A  strike  or  lockout 
in  peace  time  was  looked  upon  as  more  or  less  a  domestic  matter. 
The  government  very  rarely  interfered,  and  only  when  it  became  a 
widespread  inconvenience.  However,  the  government  took  the  view 
that  its  duties  in  peace  time  and  war  time  were  different.  It  took 
the  view  that  its  duty  was  to  interfere  between  employers  and  em- 
ployees to  prevent  interruption  of  supplies  vital  to  the  success  of  the 
armies.  The  government  viewed  thic  matter  with  such  gravity  that 
power  was  granted  by  the  act  to  imprison  for  life  any  one  who 
incited  to  strikes  or  interfered  with  the  operation  of  the  agreement. 
It  never  enforced  this  penalty.  Public  opinion  was  generally  suffi- 
cient to  enforce  the  act. 

(4)  The  trade  unions  agreed  to  waive  all  their  practices  and 
customs  which  tended  to  restrict  either  employment  or  output,  such 
as  the  employment  of  only  union  labor,  and  the  use  of  only  skilled 
persons  on  skilled  jobs;  and  they  promised  to  do  their  utmost  to 
see  that  that  agreement  was  carried  through.  They  agreed  also  that 
any  person,  man  or  women,  would  be  allowed  to  do  any  kind  of 
work.  In  return  for  these  important  concessions  the  government 
pledged  itself  to  restore  pre-war  conditions  in  shops  after  the  war. 
The  trade  unions  leaders  abided  loyally  by  that  agreement  and  act. 

In  other  words,  labor  was  to  give  up  its  chief  offensive  weapon 
(the  strike)  by  which  it  could  achieve  a  drastic  reconsideration  of 
its  status  and  standard  of  living,  and  also  its  system  of  defensive 
trenches  (its  trade  union  restrictions,  with  respect  to  speeding  up, 
overtime,  apprenticeship  and  the  like)  by  which  it  could  safeguard 
the  standards  it  had  gained  in  the  past.  In  return  for  what?  A 
promise,  not  a  fulfilment: 

The  relaxation  of  existing  demarcation  restrictions  and  admis- 
sion of  semi-skilled  or  female  labor  shall  not  affect  adversely  the 
rates  customarily  paid  for  the  job. 

And  the  A.  S.  E.  obtained  the  additional  promise: 

That  the  Government  will  undertake  to  use  its  influence  to  secure 
the  restoration  of  previous  conditions  in  every  case  after  the  war. 

Already  the  majority  of  munition  workers  were  women.  Their 
interests  were  not  directly  represented.  One  of  their  spokesmen 
wrote  to  Lloyd  George  for  a  definition  of  "rates  customarily  paid." 

Lloyd  George  said: 

The  words  which  you  quote  would  guarantee  that  women  under- 
taking the  work  of  men  would  get  the  same  piece-rate  as  men  were 
receiving  before  the  date  of  the  agreement. 


^^ 


SHOP  STEWARDS  AND  THEIR  SIGNIFICANCE      155 

This  meant  that  the  piece-rate  but  not  the  time-rate  was  guar- 
anteed. But  the  time-rate  is  the  basic  standard  for  wages,  because, 
without  a  time-rate  guarantee,  the  piece-rate  can  be  nibbled  away. 
Also,  many  operations  are  not  on  piece-work.  So  the  Treasury 
Agreement  did  not  safeguard  the  new  unskilled  workers.  The  re- 
sult was,  in  the  testimony  of  Mrs.  Drake:  ^  "The  women's  earn- 
ings fell  to  just  one-half  the  earnings  of  the  men,  although  the  output 
of  each  was  exactly  the  same." 

The  first  Munitions  of  War  Act  incorporated  this  Treasury  Agree- 
ment. It  went  further  and  prevented  the  worker  from  obtaining 
an  increase  in  wages  by  leaving  one  factory  and  going  to  another. 
It  prevented  him  by  enacting  that  he  must  obtain  a  "leaving  cer- 
tificate" from  his  former  employer,  or  else  go  idle  for  six  weeks.  The 
wording  was  this  (Clause  Seven) :  "A  person  shall  not  give  employ- 
ment to  a  workman  who,  within  the  previous  six  weeks,  has  been 
employed  in  or  in  connection  with  munition  work,"  unless  the 
workman  held  a  certificate  from  the  employer  that  he  left  work 
with  the  consent  of  his  employer.  Moreover,  while  this  Munitions 
of  War  Act  permitted  the  employer  an  advance  of  twenty  per  cent 
in  profits  over  the  profits  of  the  three  preceding  years,  it  did  not 
permit  an  average  rise  in  the  rate  of  wages  sufficient  to  meet  the  rise 
in  the  cost  of  living.  G.  D.  H.  Cole,  the  Guild  Socialist  and  labor 
investigator,  says  of  it: 

In  the  Munitions  Act,  the  state  virtually  entered  into  a  profit- 
sharing  arrangement  with  the  employers  for  the  exploitation  of  labor, 
lending  its  disciplinary  powers  to  the  employers  for  the  period  of 
the  war. 

UNREST  AND  MITIGATIONS 

Mitigations  were  gradually  found.  A  Labour  Supply  Committee 
drew  up  a  memorandum  (Circular  L.  2)  which  became  a  statutory 
order  fixing  a  rate  of  wages  for  women.  And  Circular  L.  3  fixed 
the  rate  of  wages  for  semi-skilled  and  unskilled  men.  By  January, 
1916,  the  Munitions  of  War  Amendment  Act  made  L.  2  and  L.  3 
legal  and  mandatory  in  government-controlled  factories. 

No  less  than  three  sets  of  adjustment  agencies  were  set  up  to 
which  the  workers  could  appeal.-  The  title  of  the  Committee  on 
Production  was  a  misnomer.  Some  such  scope  may  have  been  in 
mind  at  the  time  of  its  creation  but  its  work  has  been  largely  in 
the  adjustment  of  grievances  between  the  employers  and  the  m.en's 

*  "Women  in  the  Engineering  Trades,"  by  Barbara  Drake. 
*This  was  exclusive  of  the  Minimum  Wage  Boards  in  certain  sweated 
trades. 


IS6  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

unions.  At  first  it  was  made  up  of  representatives  of  the  govern- 
ment merely;  but  under  pressure  from  labor,  its  membership  was 
expanded,  and  therafter  composed  of  nine  members,  three  chairmen 
representing  the  public,  three  labor  men  and  three  employers  sitting 
in  groups  of  three  as  arbitration  courts.  Where  the  question  was 
one  involving  women,  it  came  under  the  munitions  arbitral  trib- 
unals. It  was  before  these  bodies  that  general  adjustments  were 
brought,  which  would  ordinarily  come  under  collective  bargaining. 
Rulings  once  made,  if  there  was  question  as  to  their  meaning,  or 
the  workers  or  employers  claimed  that  they  were  being  wrongly 
enforced,  the  case  was  reopened  in  the  same  tribunal  for  reinterpre- 
tation  and  enforcement.  But  when  it  was  a  simple  case  of  whether 
an  existing  rate  or  decision  was  being  observed  in  a  given  plant, 
the  complainant  turned  from  the  national  bodies  to  the  district 
munitions  courts.  For  example,  if  a  woman  was  being  paid  forty 
shillings  when  the  arbitral  tribunal  had  awarded  fifty  for  that  kind 
of  work,  she  might  start  proceedings  just  as  an  individual  starts 
proceedings  in  a  civil  court  for  collection  of  a  debt.  The  presiding 
officer  was  usually,  but  not  always,  a  barrister,  but  lawyers  were 
not  permitted  to  practise  before  these  courts.  He  was  assisted  by 
two  assessors,  one  nominated  by  the  employers,  and  one  (if  the  case 
were  that  of  a  woman)  by  the  National  Federation  of  Women  Work- 
ers. 

A  further  explanation  of  the  widening  cleavage  between  the  rank 
and  file  and  the  old  leaders,  especially  those  who  went  into  the 
government,  was  the  slowness  with  which  this  new  wartime  machin- 
ery too  often  functioned,  coupled  with  the  lack  of  consistent  policy 
toward  meeting  the  issues  raised  by  the  rising  cost  of  living,  by 
the  change  from  time  to  piece  rates,  and  by  the  revolutionary  changes 
in  method. 

For  example,  the  National  Federation  of  Women  Workers  had 
endeavored  for  a  long  time  to  get  a  minimum  wage  ruling  for  a 
certain  very  large  class  of  operatives  in  munitions  work.  The 
government  let  the  thing  drag  unconscionably.  Finally  the  girls  at 
Newcastle,  some  thousands  of  them,  struck.  The  Federation  was 
peppered  with  wires  and  long  distance  telephone  calls  from  govern- 
ment officials  telling  them  that  the  strike  was  contrary  to  the  law 
and  insisting  that  they  should  tell  the  girls  to  go  back  to  work. 
The  Federation  said  that  it  had  tried  for  months  to  get  the  govern- 
ment to  set  a  minimum  rate  but  without  avail.  It  had  not  advised 
the  girls  to  strike,  nor  would  it,  under  the  circumstances,  advise 
them  to  quit  striking.  The  issue  lay  between  the  munitions  office 
and  the  strikers.  Within  twenty-four  hours  the  award  was  granted, 
for  this  was  important  war  work,  but  the  award  was  for  these 


SHOP  STEWARDS  AND  THEIR  SIGNIFICANCE     157 

Newcastle  girls  alone.  It  took  six  weeks  before  similar  rates  were 
granted  in  other  plants,  and  in  each  one  the  issue  had  to  be  raised 
that  the  rate  had  been  granted  in  Newcastle.  And  it  took  four 
months  before  a  general  order  was  issued  covering  all  work  of 
this  sort  in  the  United  Kingdom.  As  it  was,  the  Newcastle  girls 
got  five  pence  an  hour  as  against  four  pence  halfpenny  which  was 
given  to  their  less  militant  fellows.  The  result  was  to  spread  a  dis- 
trust of  the  government's  sincerity  among  a  growing  body  of  women 
who  were  having  their  first  experience  at  wage  earning. 

In  general  we  have  the  Standing  Joint  Committee  of  Industrial 
Women's  Organizations  reporting  that  "the  promises  to  munition 
workers  generally  of  a  fair  minimum  have  so  far  materialized  pre- 
cisely in  proportion  to  the  energy  of  the  organizations  concerned." 

To  the  skilled  engineer  his  standard  time-rate  is  everything. 
Even  when  employed  regularly  on  piece-work  or  premium  bonus  his 
prices  and  time-limits  are  fixed  on  the  basis  of  that  rate,  so  as  to 
yield  a  certain  percentage  above  it — usually  about  25.  Mr.  Lloyd 
George's  reception  on  the  Clyde  was  not  promising.  The  men's 
contention  was  that  they  were  not,  in  the  circumstances,  opposed  to 
dilution  (the  entry  of  semi-skilled  and  unskilled  workers  into  a 
skilled  trade),  but  the  guarantees  and  safeguards  against  its  post- 
war persistence  were  worthless  without  certain  conditions  as  to  the 
payment  of  standard  rates  of  wages,  etc.,  and  these  Mr.  Lloyd  George 
did  not  so  much  as  mention. 

— So  wrote  Herbert  Highton,  an  operative  engineer  and  trade 
unionist  in  July,  19 16. 

The  Fabian  Research  Department  summed  up  developments  in 
19 1 7  as  follows: 

The  trade  unions  have  abandoned  their  practice  for  the  period  of 
the  war,  and  admit  female  labor  to  every  branch  of  engineering  con- 
cerned in  munitions  of  war,  while  the  employer  retains  his  own,  and 
continues  to  exploit  female  labor  at  blackleg  and  sweated  rates  of 
wages. 

And  we  find  the  Government  Commission  of  Inquiry  into  Indus- 
trial Unrest  (July,  191 7)  presenting  among  the  causes  of  unrest 
"inconsiderate  treatment  of  women,  whose  wages  are  sometimes  as 
low  as  13  shillings;"  and  "the  introduction  of  female  labor  without 
consultation  with  the  workpeople." 

The  summary  of  its  eight  reports  on  industrial  unrest  gave  as 
causes: 

I.  High  food  prices  in  relation  to  wages  and  unequal  distribution 
of  food. 


1S8  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

2.  Restrictions  of  personal  freedom  and,  in  particular,  the  effect 
of  the  munitions  of  war  acts.  Workmen  have  been  tied  up  to  par- 
ticular factories  and  have  been  unable  to  obtain  wages  in  relation 
to  their  skill.  In  many  cases  the  skilled  man's  wage  is  less  than  the 
wage  of  the  unskilled.  Too  much  centralization  in  London  is  re- 
ported. 

3.  Lack  of  confidence  in  the  government.  This  is  due  to  the 
surrender  of  trade-union  customs  and  the  feeling  that  promises  as 
regards  their  restoration  will  not  be  kept.  It  has  been  emphasized 
by  the  omission  to  record  changes  of  working  conditions  under 
Schedule  II,  article  7,  of  the  munitions  of  war  act. 

4.  Delay  in  settlement  of  disputes.  In  some  instances  10  weeks 
have  elapsed  without  a  settlement,  and  after  a  strike  has  taken  place 
the  matter  has  been  put  right  in  a  few  days. 

5.  Operation  of  the  military  service  acts. 

6.  Lack  of  housing  in  certain  areas. 

7.  Restrictions  on  liquor.     This  is  marked  in  some  areas. 

8.  Industrial   fatigue. 

9.  Lack  of  proper  organization  amongst  the  unions. 

10.  Lack  of  communal  sense.  This  is  noticeable  in  South  Wales, 
where  there  has  been  a  break  away  from  faith  in  parliamentary 
representation. 

11.  Inconsiderate  treatment  of  women,  whose  wages  are  some- 
times as  low  as  13s. 

12.  Delay  in  granting  pensions  to  soldiers,  especially  those  in 
class  "W"  reserve. 

13.  Raising  the  limit  of  income-tax  exemption. 

14.  The  workmen's  compensation  act.  The  maximum  of  i  pound 
weekly  is  now  inadequate. 

Professor  Gerald  Stoney,  in  his  presidential  address  to  the  en- 
gineering section  of  the  British  Association  in  19 16,  asserted  that 
"apparently  the  whole  idea  of  the  Armament  Ring"  was  "to  make  all 
the  profit  they  could  out  of  the  troubles  of  the  Empire." 

All  this  led  the  worker  to  be  distrustful  of  phrases  about  "get- 
ting on  with  the  war,"  because  he  felt  that  certain  employers  were 
not  getting  on  with  the  war,  but  were  using  the  phrase  and  the 
emotion  it  kindled  as  a  cover  for  stripping  labor  of  its  safeguards, 
guarantees  and  gains,  built  up  by  over  a  century  of  struggle.  He 
was  strengthened  in  this  distrust  by  such  evidence  as  the  191 7 
Report  of  the  Employers'  Parliamentary  Council,  representing  print- 
ers, builders,  the  Shipping  Federation  and  other  organizations  of 
employers,  and  urging  the  repeal  of  such  legislative  protections  of 
labor  as  the  Trades  Disputes  Act  and  the  Factory  Acts. 

Further,  the  worker  was  rendered  distrustful  of  phrases  about 
"overthrowing  the  Prussian  power"  (when  they  came  from  the  gov- 
erning class  and  the  reactionary  press),  because  his  freedom  of 


SHOP  STEWARDS  AND  THEIR  SIGNIFICANCE      159 

speech,  his  freedom  of  movement,  and  his  power  of  collective  bar- 
gaining had  been  lessened  by  the  government  in  the  Munitions  of 
War  Acts,  the  Defence  of  the  Realm  Act  and  the  Military  Service 
Acts. 

The  "Carton  Foundation,"  of  which  Alfred  J.  Balfour  was  a 
trustee,  pointed  out  that: 

Many  of  the  men  who  return  from  the  trenches  to  the  great  muni- 
tion and  shipbuildings  centers  are,  within  a  few  weeks  of  their  re- 
turn, among  those  who  exhibit  most  actively  their  discontent  with 
present  conditions.  To  a  very  large  number  of  men  now  in  the 
ranks,  the  fight  against  Germany  is  a  fight  against  "Prussianism," 
and  the  spirit  of  Prussianism  represents  to  them  only  an  extreme 
example  of  that  to  which  they  object  in  the  industrial  and  social 
institutions  of  their  own  country.  They  regard  the  present  struggle 
as  closely  connected  with  the  campaign  against  capitalist  and  class- 
domination  at  home.  Unfortunately,  some  of  the  results  of  the  war 
itself,  such  as  the  Munitions  Acts  and  the  Compulsion  Acts,  have 
intensified  this  identification  of  external  and  internal  enemies.  The 
working  of  these  acts  and  the  tribunals  created  under  them  has  given 
rise  to  an  amount  of  deep  and  widespread  resentment  which  is  the 
more  dangerous  because  it  is  largely  inarticulate.  The  very  modera- 
tion and  unselfishness  shown  by  the  responsible  leaders  of  organized 
labor  are  looked  upon  by  important  sections  of  their  following  as 
a  betrayal  of  the  cause,  and  by  some  employers  as  a  tactical  oppor- 
tunity. 

THE  CLYDE  STRIKE 

This  historical  summary  of  the  early  years  of  the  war  lays  bare 
what  might  be  called  the  ground  plan  of  the  strikes  in  the  engineer- 
ing trades  and  the  shop  stewards  movement  emerging  from  them. 
It  reveals  why  the  most  vigorous  expression  of  self-government  in 
British  industry  came  during  the  war  and  because  of  the  war. 
The  principle  of  "self-determination"  was  being  fought  for  alike  in 
Belgium  and  on  the  Clyde.  The  workers  could  not  fight  for  a 
principle  on  the  battle  front,  and  at  the  same  time  permit  its  entire 
abrogation  on  the  industrial  front. 

When  the  miners  remained  outside  the  Treasury  Agreement,  the 
rank  and  file  of  other  unions  saw  that  their  own  leaders  had  signed 
away  their  collective  power.  Particularly  in  the  munition  trades, 
where  the  tide  of  "dilution"  swept  in,  the  distrust  of  their  officials 
spread  and  grew  among  the  trade  union  members. 

But  not  only  was  there  this  war-reason  why  these  trade  union 
leaders  had  lost  grip  on  their  following.  There  was  a  reason  in 
the  organization  of  union  labor  itself.    In  the  munition  or  engineer- 


i6o  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

ing  industry,  the  unions  are  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Engineers 
(275,000  members),  the  Friendly  Society  of  Isonfounders  (30^00), 
the Toolmakers  (30,000), steam  engine-makers  (over  20,000),  United 
Machine  Workers  (over  20,000),  Brass-workers  (18,000),  Electrical 
Trades  Union  (12,000)  and  so  on.  In  addition  there  are  large  en- 
gineering groups  in  the  general  labor  unions,  numbering  over  300,000. 
This  situation  makes  the  A.  S.  E.  the  dominant  union  of  the  muni- 
tion trades.  It  is  made  up  of  fitters,  turners,  machinists,  millwrights, 
smiths,  electricians,  planers,  borers,  slotters,  pattern  makers  and 
other  grades.  Thus  the  A.  S.  E.  is  a  craft  union,  but  one  composed 
of  many  kindred  grades ;  the  basis  a  common  skill.  It  has  700  home 
branches,  grouped  in  a  series  of  district  committees,  covering  each 
an  industrial  area.  The  Glasgow  District  Committee,  for  example, 
covers  about  60  branches.  The  district  committee  has  a  measure 
of  autonomy  in  framing  the  local  industrial  policy.  It  is  com- 
posed of  delegates  from  the  branches  in  the  district.  The  branch 
is  made  up  of  delegates  from  various  shops.  (So  the  policy  of  the 
branch  is  broken  up  among  the  various  interests  of  these  various 
shops.)  Just  as  the  district  committee  is  above  the  branches,  so 
the  executive  council  is  above  the  district  committees.  This  execu- 
tive council  is  the  national  administrative  body,  the  cabinet  of  the 
trade  union.     There  is  also  a  judicial  and  a  legislative  body.^ 

Now,  the  point  to  note  in  this  analysis  is  that  the  only  unit  of 
the  organization  close  to  the  workers  in  the  shop  is  the  branch, 
that  the  branch  represents  many  shops  (with  conflicting  interests), 
and  that  the  branch  does  not  deal  directly  with  the  head  office  and 
central  executive  of  the  whole  union,  but,  instead,  deals  with  a 
district  committee.  In  short,  the  rank  and  file  of  the  A.  S.  E.  are 
a  long  way  removed  from  the  central  executive,  and  as  result  the 
workers  have  felt  that  they  are  not  swiftly  and  directly  represented 
by  their  officials.  This  constitution  of  the  A.  S.  E.  dates  back  to 
1 85 1.  With  the  miners^  the  branch  is  based  on  the  industrial  unit 
of  the  coal-pit.  With  the  engineers,  the  branch  is  based  on  the 
place  where  they  live,  not  on  the  place  where  they  work. 

To  sum  up,  the  war,  bringing  in  standardized  machinery  and 
the  dilution  of  labor,  endangered  the  standard  of  living  of  the  ma- 
chine shop  workers.  Their  officials  made  bargains  with  the  govern- 
ment, which  robbed  them  of  power.  The  constitution  of  the  union 
made  it  difficult  for  the  rank  and  file  to  be  directly  represented. 
Accordingly,  they  acted  independently  of  the  Treasury  Agreement, 
of  their  officials,  and  of  their  constitution.  They  asserted  the  prin- 
ciple of  local  self-government  in  industry.  They  took  action  in 
the  shop  stewards'  movement,  which  became  the  most  revolutionary 
*  See  G.  D.  H.   Cole's  "An  Introduction  to  Trade  Unionism." 


SHOP  STEWARDS  AND  THEIR  SIGNIFICANCE      i6i 

movement  in  the  industrial  field.    It  is  breaking  ground  from  beneath 
for  workers'  control. 

The  rule-book  of  the  A.  S.  E.  says  of  the  shop  steward: 

Rule  13. — Committees  may  also  appoint  shop  stewards  in  work- 
shops or  department  thereof  in  their  respective  districts,  such  stew- 
ards to  be  under  the  direction  and  control  of  the  committee,  by 
whom  their  duties  shall  be  defined.  The  stewards  shall  be  empow- 
ered to  examine  periodically  the  contribution  cards  of  all  members, 
and  to  demand  that  alleged  members  shall  show  their  contribution 
cards  for  examination  when  starting  work.  They  shall  report  at 
least  once  each  quarter  on  all  matters  affecting  the  trade,  and  keep 
the  committee  posted  with  all  events  occurring  in  the  various  shops. 
They  shall  be  paid  4s.  for  each  quarterly  report;  namely,  3s.  for 
duty  performed,  and  is.  for  attendance  and  report  to  committee 
(conveners  of  shop  stewards  shall  receive  6d.  extra)  ;  these  to  be 
payable  by  the  district  committee.  Should  a  shop  steward  be  dis- 
charged through  executing  his  duties  he  shall  be  entitled  to  full 
wage  benefit.  If  it  is  necessary  for  stewards  to  attend  other  meet- 
ings of  the  committee  they  shall  be  remunerated  the  same  as  wit- 
nesses attending  committee  meetings. 

By  the  terms  of  the  A.  S.  E.  constitution,  then,  the  shop  stew- 
ards had  come  to  be  recognized  as  part  of  the  organization,  but 
entirely  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  district  committees. 

That  sounds  harmless  enough.  The  shop  steward  was  dues- 
collector,  reporting  to  his  branch  and  district  committee.  But  the 
war  pressure,  already  described,  crushed  dovm  on  the  worker,  ren- 
dered his  central  officials  powerless,  and  created  a  set  of  conditions 
in  the  shop  which  made  necessary  continuous  and  immediate  nego- 
tiation between  the  workers  and  their  employers.  The  shop  stew- 
ard was  the  man  who  could  perform  this  function.  He  was  in  the 
shop,  was  elected  by  the  workers,  and  merely  had  to  enlarge  a 
function  already  exercised. 

Here  is  what  happened.  In  the  Parkhead  Engineering  Works, 
there  had  been  before  the  war  20  shop  stewards,  and,  under  war 
conditions,  the  number  of  shop  stewards  was  increased  to  60.  David 
Kirkwood  was  appointed  convener  or  chief  of  the  shop  stewards,  to 
deal  with  difficulties  with  the  management,  and  report  grievances. 

When  the  Munitions  Act  of  July  2,  191 5,  was  passed,  the  work- 
ers in  the  Clyde  District  (which  included  the  Parkhead  Works) 
formed  the  Clyde  Workers  Committee,  which  discussed  the  govern- 
ment's plan  of  dilution,  and  criticised  the  attitude  of  the  executive 
officials  of  the  A.  S.  E.  and  other  unions.  As  one  labor  witness 
described  it: 


i62  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

"It  was  more  a  collection  of  angry  trade  unionists  than  anything 
else,  which  had  sprung  into  existence  because  of  the  trouble  which 
was  going  on,  on  the  Clyde." 

"Did  you  think  it  better  to  go  to  the  Clyde  Workers  Committee 
than  to  go  to  your  own  Trade  Union  officials?" 

"Oh,  yes.  Our  own  Trade  Union  officials  were  hopelessly  tied 
up.     They  could  do  nothing." 

"They  were  tied  up  by  whom?" 

"Under  the  Munitions  Act.  Where  the  men  in  the  workshop 
had  previously  sent  their  shop  stewards  to  the  A.  S.  E.  to  report 
to  their  district  committee,  the  shop  stewards  were  now  sent  to 
the  Clyde  Workers  Committee." 

This  committee  of  shop  stewards  issued  a  manifesto  saying: 

The  support  given  to  the  Munitions  Act  by  the  officials  (of  the 
A.  S.  E.  and  other  unions)  was  an  act  of  treachery  to  the  working 
classes.  We  are  out  for  unity  and  closer  organization  of  all  trades 
in  the  industry,  one  union  being  the  ultimate  aim.  We  will  support 
the  officials  just  so  long  as  they  rightly  represent  the  workers,  but 
we  will  act  independently  immediately  they  misrepresent  them. 

This  Clyde  Workers  Committee  advocated  the  view  that  the 
organized  trade  unionists  should  be  allowed  to  share  in  the  adminis- 
tration and  control  of  workshop  arrangements.  Kirkwood,  a  mem- 
ber of  this  committee,  asked  Lloyd  George  if  he  were  prepared  to 
give  the  workers  a  share  in  the  management  of  the  works.  Kirk- 
wood said  to  Lloyd  George  that  the  workers,  as  socialists,  welcomed 
dilution  of  labor,  which  they  regarded  as  the  natural  development 
in  industrial  conditions.  But  this  scheme  of  dilution  must  be  car- 
ried out  under  the  control  of  the  workers.  Without  such  control, 
cheap  wages  would  be  introduced. 

There  we  have  the  philosophy  of  the  shop  stewards  movement 
in  their  own  words — workers'  control  of  industry,  beginning  in  the 
shop,  and  industrial  unionism  (in  preference  to  craft  unionism). 

Lloyd  George's  conversation  with  Kirkwood  took  place  in  De- 
cember, 19 1 5.  In  the  following  March,  came  a  strike  in  the  Park- 
head  Works  where  Kirkwood  was  convener.  As  the  result  of  the 
strike  Kirkwood  and  nine  others  were  arrested  and  deported  outside 
the  Clyde  area,  and  the  shop  stewards  movement  spread  over  Great 
Britain. 

The  immediate  cause  of  the  strike  was  a  dilution  scheme.  Women 
were  set  at  work  in  the  howitzer  shop.  Kirkwood  and  two  shop 
stewards  interviewed  the  women,  and  saw  to  it  that  they  were 
requested  to  join  the  National  Federation  of  Women  Workers.  The 
management  of  the  works  objected  to  these  activities  of  Kirkwood, 
though  they  had  used  him  to  conciliate  the  workers  at  other  times 


SHOP  STEWARDS  AND  THEIR  SIGNIFICANCE      163 

The  result  of  the  trouble  was  the  strike  and  the  deportation.  The 
domestic  radicalism  of  the  shop  stewards  was  in  some  cases  yoked 
to  an  internationalism  which  was  close  to  pacifism.  Pacifism  is  a 
militant  doctrine  in  England,  and  the  charges  of  "unpatriotic"  utter- 
ances against  Kirkwood  and  others  entered  into  the  general  public's 
sanction  of  the  government's  methods  of  repression. 

The  Clyde  trouble  was  the  most  spectacular  of  the  cases  of  fric- 
tion in  the  munition  trades,  but  it  was  by  no  means  an  isolated 
example.  Unquestionably  remarkable  work  was  being  done  by  the 
Production  Committee  and  the  bodies  created  under  the  Munitions 
Act  to  bring  employers  and  workers  together.  But  instances  in 
which  wage  awards  were  hung  up  for  months  at  a  time  until  the 
workers  struck  or  threatened  to  strike  spread  the  notion,  as  already 
indicated,  that  you  could  not  get  anything  from  the  authorities 
because  it  was  right  but  only  because  you  had  the  force  to  compel 
it.    The  result  was  to  provoke  strikes  no  less  than  to  prevent  them. 

Under  the  war  law,  to  strike  was  a  serious  offense,  and  to  lead 
or  counsel  or  order  a  strike  was  a  very  serious  one.  As  we  have 
seen,  it  was  not  the  responsible  national  officers  of  the  older  unions 
that  led  the  strikes.  They  stood  by  the  government  in  their  agree- 
ment. But  because  they  did  not  stand  by  the  men,  in  the  minds  of 
many  of  the  workers  themselves,  the  shop  stewards  came  up.  They 
led  the  men  and  paid  the  penalty. 

Here,  again,  in  dealing  with  the  strikes,  the  government  policy 
did  not  work  out  well.  Its  experience  with  deporting  the  strike 
leaders  from  the  Clyde  worked  out  so  disastrously  that  it  never 
again  attempted  drastic  measures  wholesale.  Deportation  is  some- 
thing which  is  peculiarly  offensive  to  the  English  worker.  It  smacks 
of  South  Africa;  it  goes  against  his  ingrained  ideas  as  to  his  rights 
in  his  own  home,  and  in  his  own  home  town.  And  while  the  labor 
movement  in  England  might  have  been  of  two  minds  as  to  the 
issues  of  the  Clyde  strike  and  the  notions  of  its  leaders,  it  was  not 
of  two  minds  as  to  the  treatment  of  the  Clyde  strikers.  McManus 
was  deported  from  Glasgow  to  another  city  which  had  been  a  center 
of  labor  conservatism,  with  the  result  that  that  city  thereafter 
became  a  hotbed  of  agitation.  Kirkwood  states  that  the  A.  S.  E. 
Court  of  Appeal  asked  him  to  become  its  chairman. 

The  government  took  the  position  in  the  case  of  a  strike  that 
it  would  not  treat  with  the  workers  unless  they  went  back.  But 
a  labor  leader  stated  to  us  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  government 
had  crumpled  in,  time  and  again,  and  beat  the  devil  around  the 
stump  in  some  other  way;  for  example,  by  granting  the  demand, 
or  some  measure  of  it,  without  treating  with  the  workers.  This 
seemed  so  sweeping  a  statement  that  we  took  it  up  with  a  govern- 


i64  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

ment  official  who  frankly  admitted  its  truth.  The  results  went  to 
show  pretty  conclusively  that  the  way  to  prevent  strikes  is  not  to 
prohibit  them. 

WHAT    THE    STEWARDS    STAND    FOR 

But,  as  brought  out  on  the  Clyde,  the  shop  stewards  stand  for 
something  more  far-reaching  and  constructive  in  its  implications  than 
the  right  to  strike.  They  were  asserting  the  right  to  an  increased 
share  in  workshop  management.  They  were  doing  it  without  con- 
sultation with  the  old-line  officials  of  the  unions  ("We  do  not  recog- 
nize them,"  said  Kirkwood),  and  they  were  acting  through  an 
organization  of  shop  stewards,  representing  unofficially  all  the  shops 
in  the  district. 

The  position  of  the  shop  steward  is  a  detail  in  trade  union  organ- 
ization. The  impulse  of  which  the  shop  steward  is  an  expression 
is  from  the  rank  and  file  of  the  labor  movement.  He  came  at  a 
moment  of  arrest,  when  the  trade  union  officials  had  been  blocked 
by  war  legislation.  He  gathered  up  the  dynamic  of  the  rank  and 
file  and  went  ahead,  while  the  officials  had  to  mark  time.  He  cap- 
tured the  imagination  of  the  unrepresented  workers  by  direct  action 
just  when  compromise  and  postponement  were  being  forced  upon 
them  by  their  former  leaders.  The  shop  stewards  as  a  group  are 
young  men,  the  central  officials  are  middle-aged.  The  shop  stew- 
ards are  not  inured  by  a  lifetime  of  troubled  experience  to  piece-meal 
gains,  to  opportunism.  In  the  hour  when  government  officials  were 
devising  programs  of  workshop  committees  and  joint  councils,  the 
shop  stewards  formed  their  own  committees — living  embodiments  of 
the  Whitley  Report. 

The  danger  of  unchartered  liberty  and  youthful  dynamic  is 
clear.  Yet  a  keen  observer  of  labor  conditions  expressed  the  belief 
to  us  that  there  would  not  be  permanent  antagonism  between  the 
self-created  shop  stewards  and  the  shop  committees  set  up  under 
this  national  program.  The  stewards  have  need  for  the  committees 
in  carrying  out  their  work.  And  it  is  in  committee  organization 
that  the  permanent  basis  of  factory  control  can  be  found  in  a  demo- 
cratic way.  Nor  will  there  be  permanent  antagonism  between  the 
shop  stewards  and  the  national  unions  of  organized  labor.  They 
are  more  likely  to  be  recognized  and  harnessed  to  the  main  labor 
machine;  their  powers  definitely  limited  so  as  to  make  concurrent 
national  action  possible,  and  at  the  same  time  to  give  considerable 
latitude  in  local  matters. 

From  the  union  standpoint,  the  immediate  question  is:  Shall 
shop  stewards  of  various  trades  receive  recognition  for  common  action 
in  the  works  of  a  district?    G.  D.  H.  Cole  has  suggested  a  way  out. 


SHOP  STEWARDS  AND  THEIR  SIGNIFICANCE      165 

Let  the  general  principle  of  organization  be  that  of  the  works 
branch  (instead  of  the  residence  branch).  Then  the  shop  stewards 
will  become  the  branch  officials,  and  the  shop  stewards'  committee  the 
branch  committee.  The  unofficial  workshop  movement  will  have 
been  taken  up  into,  and  made  a  part  of,  the  official  machinery  of 
Trade  Unionism. 

At  a  national  conference  held  between  the  Engineering  Employ- 
ers' Federation  and  the  Engineering  Trade  Unions,  recognition  was 
given  to  shop  stewards,  and  their  entry  into  negotiation  in  the  early 
phases  permitted.  The  A.  S.  E.  did  not  sign  the  agreement.  In 
December,  191 7,  representatives  of  the  Engineering  Employers'  Fed- 
eration and  of  13  trade  unions  held  a  conference.  The  unions  in- 
cluded Steam  Engine  Workers,  Toolmakers,  Smiths  and  Strikers, 
Brassfounders  and  Metal  Mechanics,  Blacksmiths  and  Iron  Work- 
ers, Electricians,  Journeymen  Brassfounders,  Coremakers,  and  En- 
ginemen;  the  Workers  Union  and  General  Workers.  They  came  to 
agreement  that  the  functions  of  the  stewards,  so  far  as  they  were 
concerned  with  the  avoidance  of  disputes,  would  be  on  the  following 
lines: 

A  workman  or  workmen  desiring  to  raise  any  question  in  which 
he  or  they  are  directly  concerned  shall  in  the  first  instance  discuss 
the  same  with  his  or  their  foreman. 

Failing  settlement  the  question  shall,  if  desired,  be  taken  up 
with  the  management  by  the  appropriate  shop  stewards  and  one 
of  the  workmen  directly  concerned. 

If  no  settlement  is  arrived  at  the  question  may,  at  the  request 
of  cither  party,  be  further  considered  at  a  meeting  to  be  arranged 
between  the  management  and  the  appropriate  shop  steward,  together 
with  a  deputation  of  the  workmen  directly  concerned.  At  this 
meeting  the  organizing  district  delegate  may  be  present,  in  which 
event  a  representative  of  the  employers'  association  shall  also  be 
present. 

The  question  may  thereafter  be  referred  for  further  considera- 
tion in  terms  of  the  provisions  for  avoiding  disputes. 

No  stoppage  of  work  shall  take  place  until  the  question  has  been 
fully  dealt  with  in  accordance  with  this  agreement  and  with  the 
provisions  for  avoiding  disputes. 

Meanwhile,  the  shop  stewards'  movement  was  spreading  out  into 
woodworking  trades,  textiles,  and  the  boot  and  shoe  trades.^     A 

^  The  manufacturing  sections  of  the  cotton  industry  are  now  beginning 
to  follow  the  spinners  in  the  creation  of  shop  committees.  The  Ashton 
and  District  Textile  Manufacturing  Trades  Federation  has  elaborated  a 
scheme  for  the  appointment  of  shop  stewards  and  shop  committees.  A 
steward  is  to  be  appointed  for  every  fifteen  or  twenty  workers,  and  the 
expenses  are  to  be  met  by  a  shop  levy  of  id.  monthly.    The  stewards  are 


i66  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

prophet  and  philosopher  of  its  extension  (himself  one  of  the  lead- 
ers) is  J.  T.  Murphy  of  Sheffield,  whose  pamphlet  has  been  accepted 
by  the  National  Conference  of  Shop  Stewards  as  voicing  their  de- 
mands. He  calls  it  "The  Workers'  Committee"  and  he  believes  that 
the  new  trade  union  organization  will  be  based  on  the  shop  and  the 
works,  instead  of  the  craft  and  the  industry.  He  gives  the  power  of 
final  decisions  always  to  the  rank  and  file,  and  never  to  the  upper 
stories  of  organization.  He  visions  shop  stewards,  shop  committees, 
plant  committees,  local  industrial  committees,  local  workers'  com- 
mittees (all  the  plants  in  a  district)  and  then  a  national  organiza- 
tion of  districts. 

Murphy  holds  that  "the  conflict  between  the  rank  and  file  of  the 
trade  unions  and  their  officials,  if  not  remedied,  will  lead  us  all  into 
muddle  and  ultimately  disaster."  He  believes  that  "government  by 
trade  union  officials"  has  become  discredited,  not  because  of  "the 
difference  between  propaganda  and  administration,"  but  because  of 
the  remoteness  of  union  officials  from  the  workshop: 

The  procedure  to  adopt  is  to  form  in  every  workshop  a  work- 
shop committee,  composed  of  shop  stewards,  elected  by  the  workers 
in  the  workshops.  Skilled,  semi-skilled,  and  unskilled  workers 
should  have  their  shop  stewards,  and  due  regard  be  given  also  to 
the  particular  union  to  which  each  worker  belongs.  We  would  also 
advise  that  there  be  one  shop  steward  to  not  more  than  15  workers. 
Another  step  is  to  intensify  the  development  of  the  workshop  com- 
mittees by  the  formation  in  every  plant  of  a  plant  or  works  com- 
mittee. To  achieve  this  all  the  stewards  of  each  firm,  from  every 
department  of  that  firm,  should  meet  and  elect  a  committee  from 
amongst  them  to  centralize  the  efforts  or  link  up  the  shop  commit- 
tees in  the  firm. 

Murphy  sees  through  this  machinery  the  modification  of  the  old 
trade  union  organizations,  "until  we  merge  into  the  great  industrial 
union  of  the  working  class." 

to  elect  from  themselves  shop  committees,  and  grievances  are  to  be  sub- 
mitted to  these  committees,  which  will  take  them  up  with  the  management. 
Failing  a  settlement  at  this  stage,  the  matter  will  be  carried  to  the  district 
trade  union  organization.  Thus  the  movement  towards  workshop  organ- 
ization goes  on  spreading  from  one  section  of  workers  to  another. 

The  Oldham  operative  cotton  spinners  have  approved  the  adoption  of 
the  shop  steward  principle  in  the  cotton  mills  by  a  majority  of  nearly  two 
to  one.  It  is  provided  under  the  scheme  that  there  shall  be  a  shop  club  at 
each  mill,  that  all  spinners  at  the  mills  must  be  members,  and  that  the 
chairman,  secretary,  and  committee  of  the  respective  shop  clubs  shall  be 
representatives  to  the  management  in  case  of  any  grievance.  Each  shop 
club  is  to  appoint  two  representatives  to  attend  the  district  monthly  meet- 
ings and  report  on  the  proceedings  to  their  club. 


SHOP  STEWARDS  AND  THEIR  SIGNIFICANCE      167 

But  one  thing  is  sure.  While,  as  we  shall  see  in  succeeding  chap- 
ters, the  government  plans  Whitley  Committees  (with  the  consent 
of  the  employer  and  the  worker),  and  while  farseeing  employers 
encourage  them,  elsewhere  the  workers  themselves  elect  their  own 
stewards,  their  own  committees,  and  set  going  from  the  bottom  up 
the  movement  toward  workers'  control,  which  in  its  various  embodi- 
ments will  dominate  industrial  reconstruction  in  England. 

The  shop  stewards  are  those  who  have  broken  with  tradition  at 
the  place  where  the  fight  is  hardest — in  their  own  organization,  in 
their  own  workshop. 


CHAPTER  XV 

INDUSTRIAL    UNIONISM 

The  miner  working  with  the  naked  material  itself,  tearing  it 
from  its  elemental  setting,  and  lifting  it  to  its  market,  has  a  clearer 
vision  of  industry  than  the  mechanic  who  deals  with  the  tenth  part 
of  a  process  on  a  machine.  Wherefore  the  British  miners  have,  of 
all  trade  unionists,  stood  most  unbudgingly  for  self-government  in 
their  calling  as  a  whole.  It  was  the  miners  who  refused  to  come  in 
under  the  Treasury  Agreement.  They  did  not  give  up  their  right 
to  strike.  As  a  result,  their  leaders,  like  Robert  Smillie  and  Vernon 
Hartshorn,  who  defied  the  government,  have  held  the  trust  of  the 
rank  and  file. 

Out  of  1,095,000  British  coal  miners,  800,000  are  organized  in 
the  Miners'  Federation  of  Great  Britain,  of  which  Robert  Smillie 
is  head.  In  191 5,  he  became  chairman,  also,  of  the  new  Triple  Al- 
liance, composed  of  the  Miners,  the  National  Transport  Workers' 
Federation,  and  the  National  Union  of  Railwaymen.  The  Triple 
Alliance  with  its  million  and  a  half  men,  is  the  strongest  offensive 
amalgamation  that  has  ever  been  made  in  the  trade  union  world. 
Controlling  fuel  and  the  machinery  of  transport,  it  can  hold  up  the 
economic  life  of  Great  Britain.  Of  the  miners  alone,  and  their  head, 
Clynes  once  said  that  they  unmake  cabinets,  and  another  trade  union- 
ist felt  their  power  so  keenly  that  he  reminded  them  that  they  were 
not  God  Almighty. 

The  archetype  of  the  new  race  of  rulers  is  not  the  clever,  honeSt 
statesman,  J.  R.  Clynes,  nor  the  political  engineer,  Arthur  Hender- 
son. It  is  not  symbolized  by  the  pure  burning  heart  of  the  labor 
movement,  George  Lansbury,  nor  by  the  accurate,  patient,  astute, 
fact-gathering,  program-formulating  intellect,  like  Sidney  Webb  and 
G.  D.  H.  Cole.  To  the  ignorant  outsider,  and  to  several  millions  of 
the  workers  of  Britain,  who  know  their  man,  the  representative  of 
labor  at  this  time,  catching  up  its  master  ideas,  touched  with  its 
fervor,  and  conscious  of  its  delegated  power,  is  Robert  Smillie. 

Smillie  comes  from  the  same  district  which  gave  Keir  Hardy  and 
Alexander  MacDonald  (the  great  miners'  leader  and  one  of  the  first 
labor   members  of  Parliament)    to    the   English   labor   movement. 


INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  169 

While,  earlier  in  the  war,  his  views  on  war  policy  and  peace  were 
outspokenly  at  variance  with  the  general  trend  of  sentiment  within 
the  ranks  of  organized  labor,  so  secure  was  his  standing  among  the 
men  for  trusted  leadership  and  ability  that  he  was  kept  at  his  post. 
The  government  itself  appointed  him  to  membership  on  the  Whitley 
Committee  whose  report  forms  the  basis  of  British  policy  for  indus- 
trial reconstruction  after  the  war.  More  than  once  during  the  war 
he  was  asked  to  enter  the  British  ministry. 

Robert  Smiilie  has  seven  grown  sons — all  Socialists  like  their 
father.  Two  of  them  came  to  him  when  the  war  broke  out  and 
said,  "We  know  how  you  stand.  We  believe  as  you  do.  But  if 
there  is  to  be  killing  and  sweating  we  will  take  our  share  of  it." 
And  they  volunteered.  Two  other  sons  came  to  him;  they  were 
conscientious  objectors,  and  were  later  accepted  as  such  by  the  tri- 
bunals, being  allowed  to  work  in  callings  of  national  importance:  one 
on  a  farm  and  one  in  timber  cutting.  Three  other  sons  were  at 
work  in  the  mines  and  steel  mills.  One  of  the  first  named  is  an 
officer  who  put  his  training  in  the  pits  to  account  in  helping  carry 
out  the  largest  military  mining  operation  on  the  western  front.  He 
was  later  invalided  back  to  England  with  neurasthenia  as  a  result 
of  nine  days  in  which  he  was  cooped  in  a  dug-out  in  the  midst  of 
artillery  fire. 

Smiilie  him.self  is  a  Scotchman  in  the  burr  of  his  tongue  and  a 
miner  in  the  set  of  his  shoulders.  He  is  powerful  because  of  his 
position,  and  he  is  powerful  in  his  personality.  In  his  rough  tweeds, 
pipe  in  mouth,  in  a  room  so  cold  that  he  paced  back  and  forth  to 
keep  warm,  he  made  the  following  statement  to  us  at  Nottingham  of 
how  things  stood  with  the  men  of  the  mining  industry: 

Our  experience  in  this  country  was  that  when  war  was  declared 
it  undoubtedly  created  an  enormous  amount  of  enthusiasm.  Men 
of  all  ranks  rushed  to  join  the  army,  for  what  to  them  seemed  the 
holiest  cause  that  could  be — the  defense  of  small  nations  and  treaties. 
Fathers  and  sons  went  together  to  recruiting  offices,  and  fathers 
made  misstatements  about  their  ages  in  order  to  be  accepted  as 
recruits. 

Moreover,  there  seemed  to  be  a  special  desire  to  have  miners 
on  the  part  of  the  military  authorities,  who  stated  on  many  occa- 
sions that  miners  made  the  best  class  of  soldiers.  They  had  been 
used  to  facing  dangers  all  their  live",  in  mine  work.  The  nature 
of  the  employment  had  developed  them  and  made  them  strong. 
They  did  not  require  so  much  training  as  people  who  joined  from 
sedentary  employments.  Within  the  first  eighteen  months  about  a 
quarter  of  a  million  miners  joined  the  colors — or,  roughly,  25  per 
cent  of  the  mine  workers. 

We  found  so  many  miners  leaving  the  mines,  there  was  serious 


170  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

danger  that  a  falling  output  of  coal  would  interfere  with  the  en- 
gineering and  munitions  works.  A  very  large  number  of  elderly 
men  who  had  previously  been  miners  came  back  to  the  pits,  and  a 
large  number  of  outside  laborers  came  in.  In  addition,  some  thou- 
sands of  miners  who  either  broke  down  in  training  or  were  wounded 
were  sent  back.  The  military  authorities  did  not,  however,  return 
any  Class  A  men,  and  the  districts  managed  to  keep  up  output  with 
the  additional   labor   mentioned. 

It  was  evidently  the  intention  of  the  military  authorities  and 
employers  that  soldiers  coming  back  into  the  mines  and  into  muni- 
tion work  should  be  under  military  discipline  and  should  wear  the 
uniform  and  work  at  soldiers'  pay.  The  miners  in  conference  de- 
cided that  they  would  insist  that  these  men  should  have  full  civilian 
rights,  that  they  should  have  to  be  members  of  the  trade  union, 
and  that  they  should  not  be  used  as  strike  breakers.  The  government 
agreed  to  this  line,  and  the  soldiers  returned  to  the  mines  are  in 
the   same   position  as  other   workers. 

All  members  of  the  miners'  unions  who  have  gone  to  the  front 
have  been  kept  in  full  membership  without  payment  while  there, 
and  will  be  accepted  back  in  good  standing  on  their  return.  All 
those  who  have  come  into  the  mines  from  the  outside  have,  of 
course,  linked  up  with  the  unions.  FThe  present  situation  is  that 
in  probably  95  per  cent  of  the  coal  mines  of  Great  Britain  all  per- 
sons connected  with  mining  labor  must  be  members  of  the  organi- 
zation.] In  the  majority  of  the  branches  of  the  miners'  federation 
the  payment  of  sixpence  per  year  to  the  union  secures  funeral  bene- 
fits to  the  miner,  his  wife  and  children.  Because  of  the  number 
of  miners  who  joined  the  army,  the  deaths  at  the  front  have  been 
exceptionally  heavy,  and  death  claims  have  been  paid  out  in  all 
cases.  This  has  been  a  serious  drain  on  the  unions,  but  as  there 
have  been  no  serious  or  widespread  strikes,  they  are  financially 
stronger  than  they  were  prior  to  the  war.  Including  those  at  the 
front,  they  number  800,000  miners — 60,000  or  70,000  higher  than 
before  the  war.  But  no  less  than  three  hundred  thousand  have 
joined  the  forces.^  Since  the  falling  off  of  the  export  coal  trade 
the  output  of  the  mines  is,  of  course,  considerably  under  that  of 
normal  times,  not  because  the  individual  miner  has  turned  out  less, 
but  because  there  are  less  men  engaged. 

Previous  to  the  war,  miners  usually  sent  one  or  two  of  their 
sons  to  learn  a  trade  outside  the  industry;  since  the  war,  all  boys 
of  a  miner's  family,  generally  speaking,  have  gone  to  the  pits  or 
are  working  on  the  surface.  In  Scotland  the  boys  go  right  to  the 
coal  base  as  drivers ;  in  other  parts  they  go  as  trapper  boys  or  pony 
drivers.  At  all  conferences  the  miners  are  in  favor  of  raising  the 
minimum  age  to  fifteen  and  sixteen,  but  during  the  war  this  has 
not  been  possible. 

There  are  no  women  underground  in  any  part  of  Great  Britain, 

*  The  number  at  the  close  of  the  war  was  400,000, 


INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  171 

as  was  the  case  in  the  middle  of  the  last  century;  but  on  the  sur- 
face, in  Lancashire  and  Scotland,  women  have  been  employed  to 
take  the  places  of  men  and  boys  in  clearing  and  manipulating  coal 
on  the  surface.  We  insist  that  these  women  or  young  girls  receive 
the  same  wages  paid  to  the  men  or  boys  whose  work  they  are 
doing,  and  in  our  last  claim  for  an  increase  in  wages  the  women 
got  the  full  increase  of  nine  shillings  per  week,  secured  by  the  men. 
In  nearly  all  the  mining  districts  outside  of  Lancashire  and  Scot- 
land the  mine  workers  object  strongly  to  their  women  being  em- 
ployed about  the  mines.  If  it  had  not  been  for  the  war,  the  prob- 
ability is  that  a  strong  movement  would  have  been  set  afoot  to 
have  female  labor  abolished  even  in  Lancashire  and  Scotland.  The 
question  of  the  women  being  competitors  of  the  men  has  not  entered 
in.  By  insisting  on  the  same  wages  for  the  same  work  we  elimi- 
nate that.  The  miners  do  not  think  it  is  suitable  work  for  the 
future  mothers  of  the  race.  It  is  in  many  cases  dirty  and  hard  work. 
The  women  who  have  come  into  mining  work  since  the  war  broke  out 
will,  in  all  probability,  leave  it — after  things  have  settled  down. 
Under  reconstruction,  if  it  is  seriously  gone  into  in  the  nation's 
interest,  many  channels  of  employment  will  open  up,  and  make  the 
pressure  on  them  to  earn  in  this  way  less  severe. 

Probably  the  most  important  factor  in  industrial  relations  in 
the  war  was  the  attempt  of  the  government  to  put  miners  under 
the  munitions  act.  This  would  have  taken  from  them  the  right 
to  strike,  and  would  have  placed  their  leaders  under  a  clause  which 
imposed  a  heavy  fine  or  imprisonment  on  any  leader  who  had  part 
in  one.  Mr.  Lloyd  George  was  minister  of  munitions  when  that  bill 
went  through.  Accordingly,  we  saw  him  on  behalf  of  the  miners 
and  told  him  that  under  no  circumstances  would  the  miners  allow 
themselves  to  be  placed  under  the  munitions  act.  He  ultimately 
agreed.  That  very  fact  has  done  more  to  keep  some  little  shred 
of  freedom  for  the  workers  of  Great  Britain  than  any  other  thing 
that  has  happened.  All  the  strikes  that  have  taken  place  in  ship- 
yards, engineering  and  munition  centers  have  been  illegal  strikes. 
They  have  been  unconstitutional,  as  the  officials  of  the  unions  dare 
not  consent  to  them.  No  trade  union  funds  have  been  paid  out 
to  the  strikers.  Yet  the  government  could  not  act  as  strongly  as 
it  pleased  against  men  who  came  out  on  strike  because  of  the  fact 
that  the  great  mining  movement  was  still  free  to  take  industrial 
action  at  any  time.  The  government  could  not  act  drastically  else- 
where, when  the  trade  unionists  generally  knew  the  miners  had 
held  out  and  were  free ;  while  their  own  leaders  had  permitted  them 
to  be  put  under  the  act. 

One  of  the  local  branches  of  the  miners'  organization  in  Scot- 
land passed  a  resolution  that  if  other  trade  unionists  were  badly 
treated  they  would  stop  out  of  sympathy.  But  the  necessity  has 
never  arisen. 

In  South  Wales  a  dispute  broke  out  immediately  after  the  muni- 
tions  act   was   passed — the   most   important   area    in   Great   Britain 


172  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

from  the  point  of  view  that  it  suppHes  admirahy  coal  for  Britain, 
France  and  Italy. 

The  government  got  the  king  to  "proclaim"  the  South  Wales 
miners,  which  was  equal  to  placing  them  under  the  munitions  act 
for  the  time  being.  The  government  then  endeavored  to  get  them 
to  return  to  work.  But  the  very  fact  that  the  line  had  been  taken 
of  proclaiming  their  strike  as  illegal  stiffened  them ;  and  the  gov- 
ernment ultimately  had  to  take  over  control  of  the  Welsh  mines 
and  to  force  the  employers  to  concede  the  points  for  which  the 
workers  were  contending — a  substantial  increase  in  wages  to  help 
meet  the   increase   in  the  cost  of   living. 

Since  then  the  government  has  taken  over  control  of  all  the 
mines  of  Great  Britain,  metal,  as  well  as  coal ;  lime  and  other  quar- 
ries; also  brick  ovens  and  coke-producing  plants. 

In  August,  1917,  the  Miners'  Federation,  which  includes  the 
men  of  all  of  the  coal  mining  districts  of  England,  Scotland  and 
Wales,  made  a  demand  for  a  general  increase  in  wages,  to  help 
meet  the  increase  in  the  cost  of  living.  They  made  this  demand 
not  to  the  mine  owners,  but  directly  to  the  government  through 
the  coal  controllers  and  threatened  a  common  strike  unless  a  sub- 
stantial advance  was  conceded.  In  September  last  an  increase  of 
one  and  sixpence  per  day  was  granted  to  all  men  and  women  work- 
ing in  and  about  the  mines  who  were  over  sixteen  years  old,  and 
ninepence  per  day  to  all  minors  under  sixteen. 

THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 

To  turn  to  the  other  members  of  the  Triple  Alliance.  The  rail- 
way service  is  well  organized.  The  National  Union  of  Railwaymen 
has  401,000  members.  Its  secretary  is  J.  H.  Thomas,  M.  P.  He 
is  one  of  the  half-dozen  strongest  labor  leaders  in  Great  Britain. 
He  has  canny  common  sense,  limpid  sincerity,  and  a  powerful  voice 
out  of  a  small  body  to  make  known  his  views. 

The  other  considerable  unions  in  the  railway  service  are  the 
Associated  Society  of  Locomotive  Engineers  and  Firemen  (38,000), 
and  the  Railway  Clerks'  Association  (60,000).  Altogether  there 
are  610,000  railway  employees. 

The  class  consciousness  of  railwaymen  was  heightened  by  the 
fact  that  the  Taff  Vale  case  of  1902  and  the  Osborne  judgment  of 
1909  fell  within  their  organization.  The  Taff  Vale  Railway  Com- 
pany won  its  case  against  the  railway  union  for  damages  because  of 
breach  of  contract  from  a  strike.  If  this  had  become  precedent, 
trade  union  action  industrially  would  have  been  crippled.  The 
Osborne  case  was  one  in  which  a  railwayman  claimed  an  injunction 
against  using  trade  union  funds  for  political  purposes.  If  this  had 
stood,  trade  union  action  politically  would  have  been  stalled.  [See 
Chapter  XII.] 


INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  173 

Out  of  these  and  other  experiences,  the  railwaymen  learned  their 
common  interest,  and  built  a  constitution  which  gives  them  true 
industrial  unionism  in  which  all  grades  of  labor  are  represented 
(instead  of  being  split  up  and  walled  off  by  a  multitude  of  craft 
unions).  A  national  conference  in  191 7  of  the  district  councils  of 
the  railwaymen,  called  for  state  ownership  of  the  railways  after  the 
war  "to  be  jointly  controlled  and  managed  by  the  state  and  repre- 
sentatives of  the  National  Union  of  Railwaymen." 

Under  the  occupational  group  of  transport  come  the  National 
Sailors  and  Firemen's  Union  (70,000),  National  Union  of  Ships' 
Stewards,  Cooks,  Butchers  and  Bakers  (20,000);  the  Waterside 
workers  with  their  National  Union  of  Dock  Labourers  (50,000), 
Dock,  Wharf,  Riverside  and  General  Workers'  Union  (65,000);  the 
vehicle  workers  with  their  vehicle,  tramway,  motormen,  lorrymen, 
and  carters  associations.  The  National  Transport  Workers'  Federa- 
tion has  over  300,000  members. 

The  Triple  Alliance  grew  naturally  out  of  a  need.  A  coal  strike 
hits  railwaymen.  A  railway  strike  hits  miners  and  dockers.  A  dock 
strike  ties  up  coal  brought  by  railways  to  the  waterfront.  Strikes 
in  191 1  and  19 12  on  railways,  docks  and  mines  had  partly  failed, 
so  the  executives  of  the  Miners,  the  National  Union  of  Railwaymen 
and  the  National  Transport  Workers'  Federation  held  conferences 
in  19 14,  and  a  scheme  of  joint  action  was  ratified  on  December  9, 
191 5,  for  "matters  of  a  national  character." 

When  a  delegation  from  the  Triple  Alliance  visited  the  Premier, 
the  London  Times  said: 

The  delegates  are  waiting  on  the  Prime  Minister  to  issue  their 
orders.  This  body  of  trade  unionists  is  formally  attempting  to 
supercede  constitutional  government  and  to  frighten  the  appointed 
Ministers  of  the  Crown  into  doing  their  will. 

There  is  no  question  that  Robert  Smillie,  Vernon  Hartshorn, 
J.  H.  Thomas,  Robert  Williams,  and  the  other  members  of  the  three 
executive  committees  of  the  Triple  Alliance  see  the  vast  implica- 
tions of  their  coalition.  Such  power  has  passed  into  their  hands  as 
no  human  beings  outside  a  war  cabinet  have  exercised  in  modern 
days.  They  will  mould  the  British  labor  movement  of  the  future, 
and  the  structure  of  the  state  may  be  modified  by  their  action. 

THE  ECONOMIC   WEAPON 

In  June,  19 18,  the  writer  sat  at  luncheon  with  one  of  the  execu- 
tive committee  of  the  Miners'  Federation.  He  told  how  German 
guns  now  commanded  French  mines  so  that  where  900,000  tons  of 


174  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

coal  a  month  had  hitherto  been  mined,  now  100,000  tons  were  being 
mined,  leaving  a  shortage  of  800,000  tons.  This  shortage  had  to 
be  met  by  the  British  miners,  in  large  part  by  the  Welsh  miners. 
They  were  aware  that  by  stopping  work  they  could  end  the  war  in 
nine  days,  because  this  coal  was  essential  for  the  transport  of  troops. 
But  the  power  this  gave  them,  they  did  not  see  how  to  use  at  the 
moment  for  a  democratic  gain.  If  they  quit  work,  their  own  troops 
would  be  let  down,  and  the  Germans  would  come  through.  They 
held  to  their  job. 

This  illustrates  the  latent  power  of  unionism  in  the  economic 
field.  In  the  days  of  reconstruction,  organized  labor  will  be  the 
driving  force  behind  any  drastic  change  in  the  new  social  order. 
When  Smillie  swings  the  Triple  Alliance,  he  will  smite  with  its  three- 
fold weight.    As  Smillie  has  said: 

The  Triple  Alliance  has,  for  the  period  of  the  war,  acted  only 
on  the  defensive,  but  there  will  come  a  time  when  we  shall  formu- 
late proposals  of  aggressive  action.  The  mere  threat  ought  to  be 
sufficient  to  bring  about  our  well-thought-out  democratic  demands. 

In  writing  of  the  British  labor  movement,  it  is  worth  while  to 
define  it  precisely.  We  have  defined  it  on  its  political  side.  With 
its  outstanding  economic  formation  before  us — the  Triple  Alliance, 
we  shall  now  define  it  on  its  industrial  side.  Because  of  the  cour- 
tesy of  G.  D.  H.  Cole,  we  had  access  to  the  figures  for  19 18  he  had 
patiently  gathered  for  his  then  unpublished  book,  "An  Introduction 
to  Trade  Unionism." 

In  1892,  in  a  population  of  40  millions,  the  trade  unions  of  the 
United  Kingdom  had  a  membership  of  about  one  million  and  a 
quarter  (100,000  women).  At  the  end  of  1916,  the  membership 
was  4,399,696  (about  535,000  women).  To-day  in  a  population 
of  47  millions,  the  membership  is  5,000,000,  over  forty-five  per 
cent,  of  the  male  manual  workers.  This  is  a  more  advanced  stage 
than  in  the  United  States,  where  the  American  Federation  of  Labor 
has  something  over  three  millions  in  a  population  of  a  hundred 
millions.  In  Great  Britain,  the  basic  industries  are  organized,  and 
in  several  instances  the  organization  is  nearly  proof  against  "black- 
legs." One-half  of  trade  union  membership  is  in  the  engineering 
and  shipbuilding  industries,  textiles  and  coal-mining. 

The  engineering  or  metal  trades  we  have  studied  in  detail  in 
the  preceding  chapter;  the  miners  in  this. 

In  the  shipbuilding  trades,  the  chief  unions  are  the  United  Society 
of  Boilermakers  (80,000),  and  the  Shipwrights  Association  (30,000). 

The  general  labor  unions  have  a  membership  of  several  hundred 
thousand  (300,000  in  the  munition  trades,  alone).    These  include 


INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  175 

the  Workers'  Union  (350,000),  National  Union  of  General  Workers 
(250,000),  National  Amalgamated  Union  of  Labour  (110,000).  The 
national  Federation  of  General  Workers  includes  most  of  these  in 
its  membership  of  700,000. 

In  building,  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Carpenters,  Cabinet- 
makers and  Joiners  have  100,000. 

The  textile  trades  include  the  Amalgamated  Association  of  Card, 
Blowing  and  Ring-Room  Operatives  (60,000),  the  Amalgamated 
Association  of  Weavers,  Winders,  Warpers  (200,000),  the  Amal- 
gamated Association  of  Operative  Cotton  Spinners  (50,000). 

In  post-bellum  days,  there  will  be  some  friction  inside  the  union 
movement  along  sex  lines,  although  the  woman's  union  movement 
stands  for  equal  pay  for  equal  work.  Other  conflicts  growing  out 
of  the  war  will  be  between  the  skilled  men  and  the  unskilled  who 
have  been  brought  in  and  over  questions  of  jurisdiction.  Organized 
labor  in  the  economic  field  is  itself  in  for  a  period  of  reconstruction. 
Here  again,  the  more  fluid  political  movement  adjusted  itself  to 
changed  conditions  while  the  war  was  on. 

For,  as  already  noted,  trade  unionism  is  in  the  melting  pot, 
and  in  every  branch  and  local  there  is  discussion  of  how  to  reorgan- 
ize in  the  economic  field  to  meet  the  changed  situation.  There  is  a 
general  feeling  for  more  effective  organization,  and  it  would  not  be 
surprising  if  one-half  to  two-thirds  of  the  criss-cross  of  organizations 
should  be  junked  in  time.  A  lot  of  personal  considerations  enter 
into  the  inhibitions  which  now  prevent  it.  Some  of  the  leaders 
would  lose  their  jobs  if  there  were  a  general  telescoping;  there  are 
questions  as  to  which  of  two  executives  would  be  the  top  man.  But 
these  considerations  are  likely  all  to  be  swept  aside  when  the 
workers  see  the  way  out  and  the  movement  toward  consolidation 
gets  under  way. 

There  are  already  beginnings.  Not  only  have  the  miners,  trans- 
port workers,  and  railway  men  already  created  the  Triple  Alliance, 
but  there  is  talk  of  merging  them  into  one  great  union,  with  three 
branches.  This  would  make  them  even  more  than  they  are  now 
the  dominant  organization.  Even  as  it  is,  at  the  conventions  the 
votes  swung  by  the  big  organizations  often  decide  issues,  and  in 
self-protection  other  combinations  will  be  created  to  restore  the 
equilibrium. 

The  tendency  is  toward  industrial  organization  in  the  big  coher- 
ent industrial  fields — if  by  that  is  meant  the  organization  in  one 
union  of  all  men  employed  about,  for  example,  the  mines.  Its 
operation  among  railroaders  in  the  last  ten  years  has  brought  most 
of  the  men  employed  in  and  around  railroading  into  one  unit.  In 
the  iron  and  steel  trade,  the  various  skilled  crafts  are  already  united, 


176  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

but  as  yet  have  not  broadened  into  taking  in  the  unskilled  or  semi- 
skilled men  as  in  the  case  of  the  railroads  and  mines.  On  the  other 
hand,  in  trades  where  you  do  not  have  a  few  great  employers,  or  the 
employers  are  not  organized,  the  solution  is  not  so  simple.  Here 
the  old  craft  unions  may  persist  in  a  modified  form,  after  various 
consolidations. 

Slowly,  the  many  unions  (over  iioo)  are  coming  into  effective 
industrial  combination.  The  labor  movement  is  not  weakening 
toward  a  split.  It  is  amalgamating.  In  22  organizations  are  found 
three-quarters  of  all  trade  union  membership.  The  cohesive  force 
of  the  trade  union  movement  is  clearly  revealed  in  these  terms, 
that  there  are  eight  effective  industrial  combinations,  each  with  at 
least  100,000  members,  and  a  total  membership  of  two  and  a  half 
million. 

The  eight  combinations  are  the  Miners  (800,000),  the  Railway- 
men  (400,000),  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Engineers  (270,000), 
Workers'  Union  (350,000),  National  Union  of  General  Workers 
(250,000),  Amalgamated  Weavers'  Association  (200,000),  Amal- 
gamated Society  of  Carpenters,  Cabinet-makers  and  Joiners  (iio,- 
000),  and  National  Amalgamated  Union  of  Labour  (117,000). 

This  is  the  striking  blow  behind  the  bargaining  power  of  the 
industrial  movement.  And  not  only  that,  but  when  coal,  cotton, 
transport  and  metal  workers  decide  on  a  program  of  action.  Great 
Britain  will  listen.  And  more  simply  yet,  if  the  Triple  Alliance  wills 
it,  the  industrial  Hfe  in  Britain  will  stop  short. 

Of  the  reconstruction  period,  Smillie  said  to  us: 

The  miners  are  practically  unanimously  in  favor  of  state  owner- 
ship of  the  land  and  of  replacing  the  people  as  food  producers  on  land 
which  is  now  unused.  They  are  certainly  determined  that  as  far 
as  in  them  lies  the  government  shall  not  only  continue  in  control 
of  the  mines,  but  extend  that  control  to  state  ownership.  The  syn- 
dicalist idea  of  miners'  working,  managing  and  owning  the  mines 
has  not  a  very  deep  hold  on  the  miners  of  this  country.  They 
fully  expect,  if  the  mines  are  owned  and  controlled  by  the  state, 
that  the  workmen  will  have  a  considerable  voice  in  the  management, 
in  view  of  the  fact  that  they  have  more  than  livelihood  at  stake. 
Their  safety  of  life  and  limb  justifies  the  claim  that  they  shall  be 
represented  in  the  management.  We  feel  that  many  accidents  of 
a  more  or  less  dangerous  character  arise  not  from  the  carelessness 
of  the  present  management  so  much  as  through  the  desire  to  secure 
the  largest  possible  output  at  the  smallest  possible  cost. 

I  have  probably  a  more  unique  opportunity  for  testing  the  views 
of  the  organized  workers  of  the  country  than  most  people  because 
I  have  spent  the  last  three  years  in  addressing  mass  meetings  in 
every  corner   of  England,    Scotland  and  Wales.     The  majority  of 


INDUSTRIAL  UNIONISM  177 

those  meetings  have  been  called  under  trade  union  auspices,  and 
the  chief  matters  dealt  with  have  been  the  preservation  by  organ- 
ized labor  of  the  liberties  which  it  has  taken  so  many  years  to 
secure,  and  the  furtherance  of  a  greater  after-the-war  reconstruc- 
tion movement,  by  which  the  land  of  Great  Britain  will  be  taken 
over  from  its  present  holders  and  used  in  the  interests  of  the 
people;  and  mines,  railways  and  workshops  will  be  used  for  the 
production  of  commodities  for  use,  and  not  merely  to  build  up  for- 
tunes for  the  capitalist  class. 

To  sum  up: — Nearly  half  of  the  male  adult  wage-earning  popu- 
lation is  organized  into  trade  unions.  Unskilled  or  general  workers 
have  come  inside  trade  union  organization  during  the  last  four 
years  at  an  unprecedented  rate.  Thus  the  National  Union  of  Gen- 
eral Workers  increased  its  membership  by  over  100,000  in  191 7. 
The  old  threat  of  unorganized,  casual,  unskilled,  overworked,  under- 
paid workers  destroying  the  structure  of  trade  unionism  has  disap- 
peared. Their  incorporation,  however,  is  effecting  profound  changes 
in  that  structure.  In  spite  of  many  craft  unions,  great  groups  have 
formed,  and  the  unions  have  learned  their  po\/er  in  the  state. 

They  compose  a  Trades  Union  Congress,  with  a  membership  of 
over  four  million.  Their  political  expression  is  the  British  Labour 
Party,  with  a  trade  union  membership  of  2,415,383.  Seven  hundred 
and  fifty  thousand  workers  are  organized  in  the  General  Federation 
of  Trade  Unions  for  strike  insurance  benefits  and  other  purposes. 
Three  great  groups  have  formed  the  Triple  Industrial  Alliance. 
These  organizations  represent  the  long  struggle  of  the  workers  for 
recognition.  They  have  won  power,  and  they  begin  to  wield  it. 
The  coming  years  will  witness  their  use  of  it  in  achieving  self- 
government  in  industry  and  in  reconstructing  the  economic  order. 

We  have  tried  to  give  a  fair  and  unbiased  interpretation  of  the 
facts  such  as  we  have  found  them,  not  an  expression  of  our  own  views 
on  economic  or  political  theory.  Much  of  the  discussion  of  the  rise 
of  labor,  both  in  Great  Britain  and  in  the  United  States, 
is  unintelligent  because  it  assumes  that  we  still  have  to  deal  with 
socialism  as  embodied  in  academic  programs  or  with  debatable 
questions  of  labor  organization.  Some  people  may  be  startled  when 
they  realize  the  degree  of  power  and  of  class-conscious  organ- 
ization already  reached  by  British  labor  in  the  economic  field.  But 
it  is  only  by  such  realization  that  statesmen,  industrial  managers 
and  labor  leaders  alike  will  be  able  to  deal  with  the  forces  at  work 
in  the  economic  order  intelligently  and  constructively.  A  mere 
opposition  is  as  useless  as  drifting,  and  will  have  no  other  effect 
than  that  of  aggravating  the  clash  of  interests  and  philosophies 
which  is  bound  to  come  to  a  decision  before  long. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

SELF-GOVERNMENT   IN   INDUSTRY 

The  application  of  the  principle  of  workers'  control  (self-govern- 
ment in  industry)  is  the  greatest  functional  advance  for  democracy 
since  the  state  extended  its  operation  beyond  police  power  and  be- 
came an  administrator  of  public  services. 

It  is  this  application  of  the  principle  of  democratic  control  to 
the  work-a-day  life  which  the  Bolshevists  have  aimed  at.  But  the 
application  of  the  principle  is  determined  by  the  degree  and  smooth- 
ness of  industrial  organization.  Isolated  workmen  cannot  purchase 
raw  material,  control  the  flow  of  credit,  and  market  the  product. 
Workers'  control  demands  a  long  discipline,  an  adaptation  to  the 
conditions  of  the  industry,  a  developed  capacity. 

What  the  sweated  trades  need  first  is  not  workers'  control,  but 
a  minimum  wage.  Workers'  control  is  an  elastic  term.  It  means, 
first,  a  little  control  in  the  workshop  in  regard  to  welfare  and  gen- 
eral workshop  conditions.  Then  more  control  in  relation  to  dis- 
cipline and  sanitation.  And  so  on,  up  to  full  participation  in  control 
over  the  industrial  process  inside  the  shop  and  in  the  industry  as  a 
whole.  The  degree  of  control  will  be  set  by  the  capacity  of  the 
workers  for  exercising  control. 

The  movement  toward  self-government  in  industry  in  Great 
Britain  has  expressed  itself  in  three  ways: 

(i)  The  instinctive  action  of  the  workers  themselves  (check- 
weighman  in  the  mines,  clicker  in  the  printers'  chapel,  shop  stew- 
ards in  the  metal  trades) ; 

(2)  The  action  of  far-sighted  employers  by  enlightened  self- 
abdication  of  autocratic  control  over  certain  functions  (the  Renold 
committees  at  Manchester,  the  experiments  by  Rowntree  and  other 
employers) ; 

(3)  Government  action  for  the  purpose  of  giving  effect  to  the 
reports  of  the  Whitley  Committee. 

We  have  shown  the  shop  stewards  in  action.  We  have  shown 
why  they  acted,  and  why  they  had  power  to  act.  Of  their  action, 
Dr.  Addison,  as  head  of  the  Ministry  of  Munitions,  said: 

The  present  unrest  has  largely  been  engineered  by  a  number  of 
men  who  have  set  up  organizations  known  as  shop  stewards'  cgm- 

178 


SELF-GOVERNMENT  IN  INDUSTRY  179 

mittees,  and  these  committees  appear  to  have  serious  dififerences 
with  the  Central  Trade  Union  executives.  The  Minister  of  Muni- 
tions has  no  knowledge  of  these  differences.  Several  of  the  tele- 
grams received  have  displayed  just  as  great  an  anxiety  to  upset  the 
authority  of  the  Central  Trade  Union  executives  as  anything  else. 
It  is  quite  impossible  for  the  Ministry  to  negotiate  on  labor  matters 
with  any  other  authorities  than  the  responsible  executives  of  the 
unions.  More  than  80,000  shops  in  20,000  establishments  in  the 
country  are  concerned,  and  it  would  be  quite  impossible  for  us  to 
come  to  an  understanding  with  each  collection  of  shop  stewards. 
We  must  deal  with  the  organization  which  represents  a  trade  col- 
lectively. 

The  problem,  then,  was  to  fit  shop  stewards  into  trade  union 
organization,  to  relate  a  fresh  impulse  to  an  institution.  The  in- 
stinctive action  of  the  shop  stewards  brought  them  into  conflict  with 
their  own  officials,  the  employers  and  the  government. 

But  the  shop  stewards  are  not  the  only  group  that  has  felt  its 
way  toward  self-government.  Inside  the  same  engineering  trade, 
from  which  the  shop  stewards  sprang,  there  is  developing  a  more 
orderly  movement  toward  self-government.  The  Amalgamated  So- 
ciety of  Engineers  drew  up  a  careful  outline  of  workers'  control  for 
shop  committees,  central  works  council,  local  joint  committees,  cen- 
tral conciliation  board.  Two  of  the  men,  instrumental  in  devising 
this  outline,  were  F.  S.  Button  (then  on  the  Executive  Council  of 
the  A.  S.  E.,  later  a  member  of  the  Government's  Committee  on 
Production)  and  G.  D.  H.  Cole  (the  expert  in  trade  union  organiza- 
tion). The  demarcation  of  function  in  this  hierarchy  of  commit- 
tees is  carefully  given  in  detail.  The  reader  will  find  the  full  out- 
line in  Appendix  XIV.  The  point  is  that  a  great  trade  union  is 
creating  its  own  constitution  for  self-government  in  industry. 

The  Executive  Committee  of  the  National  Union  of  Railwaymen 
likewise  has  formulated  its  detailed  demand  for  workers'  control 
(Appendix  XIV). 

The  building  trades  early  asked  for  a  builders'  national  indus- 
trial parUament,  with  a  constitution  calling  for  works  committees, 
joint  district  boards,  and  a  national  parliament. 

The  basic  principle  of  workers'  control  is  that  of  function,  "no 
function,  no  rights,"  the  fulfillment  of  function  giving  the  right  of 
control — control  of  conditions  and  processes. 

Each  of  these  programs  of  the  v,?orkers,  demanding  control,  spe- 
cifies such  matters  as  shop  rules,  welfare,  rest  periods,  working  shifts, 
adjustment  in  existing  piece  work  prices,  the  class  of  labor  to  be 
used  on  new  types  of  machinery. 

Scientific  management  will  be  closely  scrutinized  by  these  work- 


i8o  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

ers'  committees.  Health  and  the  integrity  of  personality,  as  well  as 
the  standard  of  living,  will  be  safeguarded  if  they  have  their  way 
before  speeding-up  devices,  motion  studies  and  standardized  equip- 
ment are  permitted  to  level  industry  to  a  mechanical  monotony. 
Scientific  management,  bringing  greater  productivity,  must  come, 
because  "the  real  available  net  income  would  not,  distributed  evenly 
among  the  population  of  the  United  Kingdom,  yield  more  than  £34 
per  person,  or  £136  for  an  average  family  of  four.  The  amount  of 
national  productivity  was  not  adequate  to  supply  the  full  require- 
ments of  a  progressive  people."  But  scientific  management  will 
come  only  as  the  employer  pays  the  price  of  admission,  and  that 
price  is  a  measure  of  workers'  control. 

For  years  joint  committees  have  existed  in  the  leading  trades. 
These  have  been  conciliation  boards,  with  arbitral  elements,  and 
recourse  to  some  third  impartial  authority.  The  area  of  their  func- 
tioning was  limited  to  not  much  else  than  the  historic  twins  of  wages 
and  hours.  The  new  ideas  of  control  call  for  a  negotiation  board,  on 
which  the  two  parties  meet  on  all  questions  arising  between  employ- 
ers and  employee,  especially  in  the  new  storm  centers  of  discipline 
and  management. 

Let  us  restate  the  significance  of  this  change.  Industrial  action 
centers  in  control  over  the  processes  of  production.  Political  action 
in  the  economic  field  centers  in  control  of  exchange,  taxation,  bank- 
ing and  investment.  In  industrial  action  the  British  workers  have 
won  the  right  of  collective  bargaining.  Collective  bargaining  has 
concerned  itself  mainly  with  wages  and  hours.  By  possessing  the 
right  of  collective  bargaining,  British  workers  have  organized  over 
45  per  cent,  of  the  male  adult  wage-earning  population. 

Now  the  British  worker  is  busy  in  winning  a  new  right;  affirm- 
ing a  new  concern.  It  is  that  of  producers'  control  in  the  shop, 
plant  and  national  industry.  It  is  that  of  self-government  in  indus- 
try. The  difference  between  collective  bargaining  and  workers'  con- 
trol is  at  that  invisible  line  where  wages  and  hours  pass  over  into 
status.  It  is  where  labor  ceases  to  be  bought  as  a  commodity.  It 
is  where  a  shared  management  takes  the  place  of  autocratic  orders 
and  leads  on  to  producers'  control. 

This  idea  of  self-government  in  industry  strikes  out  a  philosophy 
of  its  own.  The  National  Guild  is  a  thing  dreamed  of,  but  never 
yet  attained.  It  is  like  socialism  and  Christianity  and  brotherhood. 
The  National  Guild  is  an  extension  of  the  trade  union  till  its  struc- 
ture covers  an  industry,  embracing  both  managers  and  workers.  It 
presupposes  a  Collectivist  State.  In  popular  phrase,  its  program  is 
ownership  by  the  state,  and  management  by  the  workers.  It  repre- 
sents the  reaction  not  only  against  untrammeled  private  manipu- 


SELF-GOVERNMENT  IN  INDUSTRY  i8i 

lation  of  labor  but  against  that  form  of  state  socialism  which  builds 
up  a  bureaucracy — a  set  of  officials,  sitting  at  the  levers  of  power, 
and  invading  private  life.  Its  direct  conscious  followers  are  not 
many.  Its  indirect  influence  is  wide.  Its  organ.  The  New  Age,  has 
a  limited  but  choice  circulation.  Its  advocates,  Orage,  Mellor,  Cole, 
and  S.  G.  Hobson,  are  clear-thinking  men  whose  ideas  will  continue 
to  infiltrate  the  industrial  population. 

THE   RENOLD   PLAN 

In  this  book  we  are  not  weighing  industrial  philosophies.  We 
are  interpreting  such  reconstruction  plans  as  are  already  in  opera- 
tion, or  are  in  process  of  enactment  because  an  effective  organiza- 
tion is  the  driving  force  behind  them.  In  the  movement  toward 
self-government  in  industry,  certain  employers  have  been  among  the 
wise  leaders.  One  of  these  is  C.  G.  Renold,  a  north  of  England 
metal  trades  employer,  who  has  carried  out  his  ideas  at  his  Man- 
chester works.  Renold  represents  the  new  type  of  employer  who 
understands  the  democratic  movement  in  industry.     He  says: 

The  Shop  Stewards'  Committee,  in  the  engineering  trade,  at 
least,  is  fairly  certain  to  constitute  itself  without  any  help  from  the 
management.  The  management  should  hasten  to  recognize  it,  and 
give  it  every  facility  for  carrying  on  its  business,  and  should  en- 
deavor to  give  it  a  recognized  status  and  to  impress  it  with  a 
sense  of  responsibility. 

He  states  that  he  comes  to  the  subject  of  industrial  unrest  "with 
the  conviction  that  the  worker's  desire  for  more  scope  in  his  work- 
ing Hfe  can  best  be  satisfied  by  giving  him  some  share  in  the  direct- 
ing of  it;  if  not  of  the  work  itself,  at  least  of  the  conditions  under 
which  it  is  carried  out." 

Renold  stresses  the  need  for  '*a  new  orientation  of  ideas  with 
regard  to  industrial  management.  The  trend  of  such  ideas  must 
be  in  the  direction  of  a  devolution  of  some  of  the  functions  and 
responsibilities  of  management  on  to  the  workers  themselves." 

He  begins  with  the  conviction  of  this  need.  He  assumes  it  with- 
out argument  as  a  proved  case.  What  concerns  him  is  the  machinery 
for  the  new  social  order  already  thrusting  up  through  the  welter  of 
war.  Such  utter  relegation  to  the  scrap  heap  of  an  old  order  with  its 
obsolete  autocratic  methods  may  shock  some  Americans.  But 
the  average  British  employer  is  a  more  enlightened  person  than  the 
average  American  employer,  because  he  has  been  chastened  by  a 
powerful  and  ever-growing  trade  union  movement,  which  has  long 
won  the  right  of  collective  bargaining  and  of  participation  in  the 


i82  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

determination  of  legal  minimum  wage  standards.  So  when  a  prole- 
tarian philosophy  of  functional  rights  (the  right  of  the  producer  to 
control  the  conditions  and  the  processes  of  his  production)  is  dis- 
charged at  the  British  employer,  he  does  not  fight  it  blindly.  He 
listens,  and  sometimes  he  accepts  important  elements  and  applies 
them  to  his  organization.  Detailed  instances  of  this  application  by 
enlightened  employers  will  be  found  in  the  Appendix. 

Renold  takes  high  ground  in  outlining  his  shop  organization.  He 
says: 

The  satisfaction  to  be  derived  from  work  depends  upon  its  being 
a  means  of  self-expression.  This  depends  on  the  power  of  control 
exercised  by  the  individual  over  the  materials  and  processes  used, 
and  the  conditions  under  which  the  work  is  carried  out. 

He  recognizes  the  possibility  of  "the  greater  cumbersomeness  of 
democratic  proceedings"  in  mechanical  efficiency,  but  puts  his  money 
on  "freedom,  initiative,  interest,  willing  work  and  cooperation." 

The  questions  of  importance  for  joint  consultation  are  wage  and 
piece-rate  question,  and,  to  a  lesser  degree,  "workshop  practices  and 
customs."    Also,  "safety  and  hygiene,  shop  amenities." 

Or,  in  his  systematic  grouping,  the  questions  in  connection  with 
which  shop  organizations  would  primarily  benefit  the  workers 
are: 

Collective  bargaining,  which  includes  wages ;  piece-work  rates ; 
the  application  of  special  legislation,  awards,  agreements;  total  hours 
of  work;  new  processes  or  change  of  process;  grades  of  work,  due 
to  the  introduction  of  new  types  of  machines. 

Grievances,  which  include  petty  tyrannies  by  foremen,  too  rigid 
rules,  wrongful  dismissal. 

General  shop  conditions  and  amenities,  which  include  shop  rules 
on  smoking,  tidiness;  maintenance  of  discipline,  time-keeping  en- 
forcement, meal  hours,  arrangements  of  shifts;  accidents  and  sick- 
ness, safety  appliances,  rest  room  arrangements,  medical  advice; 
dining  service ;  shop  comfort  and  hygiene,  temperature,  ventilation, 
seats,  drinking  water ;  benevolent  work,  shop  collections  for  char- 
ities, sick  club,  saving  societies. 

General  social  amenities,  which  include  works  picnics,  games, 
musical   societies. 

Then  come  those  matters  on  which  joint  discussion  would  pri- 
marily be  of  advantage  to  the  management.  These  are  interpreta- 
tion of  the  management  to  the  workers,  education  in  shop  processes 
and  trade  technique,  promotion,  education  in  general  business  ques- 
tions. 


SELF-GOVERNMENT  IN  INDUSTRY  183 

What  are  the  requirements  which  the  new  democratic  machinery- 
must  satisfy? 

No  works  committee  can  be  a  substitute  for  the  trade  union,  and 
no  attempt  must  be  made  by  the  employer  to  use  it  in  this  way.  It 
will  be  necessary  for  the  trade  unionists  to  develop  some  means  of 
working  committees  into  their  scheme  of  organization,  otherwise 
there  will  be  the  danger  of  a  works  committee,  able  to  act  more 
quickly  through  being  on  the  spot,  usurping  the  place  of  the  local 
district  committee  of  the  trade  unions. 

Exactly  the  thing  that  took  place  with  the  Clyde  Shop  Stewards, 
as  we  have  seen  in  a  preceding  chapter. 

The  committee  must  represent  all  grades  of  workers.  It  must  be 
in  touch  with  the  management  as  an  integral  functioning  part  of 
the  organization,  not  as  a  mere  grievance  committee.  It  must  pos- 
sess rapidity  of  action. 

The  committees  must  represent  skilled  and  unskilled,  various 
unions,  women.  "It  will  probably  be  necessary  to  have  at  least  two 
kinds  of  works  committees:  one  representing  trade  unionists  as 
such,  the  other  representing  simply  works  departments." 

Finally,  the  success  of  works  committees  will  depend  on  the 
success  of  the  management.  "The  better  organized  and  more  con- 
stitutional the  management  is,  the  more  possible  is  it  for  policy  to 
be  discussed  with  the  workers."  In  other  words,  the  "bad"  em- 
ployer in  sweated  unorganized  trades  vAth  a  huge  labor  turn-over 
will  not  offer  much  point  of  junction  for  workers'  committees.  We 
shall  see  later  in  this  chapter  how  the  government  purposes  (through 
the  Whitley  recommendations  and  trade  boards)  to  legislate  him  into 
"goodness." 

We  have  already  quoted  Renold  on  shop  stewards.  He  accepts 
them.  "It  is  doubtful,  however,  whether  a  shop  stewards'  com- 
mittee can,  or  should,  cover  the  full  range  of  workers'  activities, 
except  in  the  very  simplest  type  of  works."  His  reasons  are  that 
the  shop  stewards  will  deal  primarily  with  wages  and  piece-work 
questions  on  the  basis  of  bargaining  and  as  trade  unionists,  disre- 
garding more  general  matters  of  workshop  amenities,  and  that  the 
shop  stewards  represent  not  the  whole  of  the  workers,  but  only  the 
better  organized  sections. 

Renold  finally  works  out  in  exact  detail  the  three  kinds  of  com- 
mittees, which  he  finds  necessary  to  cover  all  the  functions — the 
shop  stewards  committee,  the  welfare  committee,  and  the  social 
union.  His  analysis  of  their  separate  functions  will  be  found  in  Ap- 
pendix XII. 

We  have  presented  C.  G.  Renold's  views  and  the  details  of  his 


i84  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

organization,  because  the  actions  of  an  employer  who  understands 
industrial  democracy  and  applies  it  are  of  more  value  than  the 
reports  of  writers  and  closet  theorists  (from  whom  have  come  many 
programs  of  reconstruction). 

OTHER   EMPLOYERS 

The  Burnage  Works  of  Renold  described  above  have  17  depart- 
ments, with  1000  male  workers  and  1600  women. 

The  Rolls-Royce  works  in  engineering  and  motor  cars  have  6000 
employees  in  80  departments,  of  which  nearly  40  have  shop  stew- 
ards. The  works  committee  is  one  of  shop  stewards,  each  depart- 
ment electing  its  own  shop  steward  (over  half  of  the  shop  stewards 
belong  to  the  A.  S.  E.).  The  management  discusses  with  the  com- 
mittee changes  of  process,  the  base  times  for  premium  bonus  work, 
dilution.  The  shop  steward  system  here,  with  its  representatives 
from  the  A.  S,  E.,  coppersmiths,  pattern-makers  and  others,  has 
fitted  into  the  official  higher  trade  union  structure. 

The  Phoenix  Dynamo  Company,  with  4,000  employees,  has  de- 
vised a  system  for  fixing  piece-work  prices  by  continuous  arbitra- 
tion. The  firm  says,  "There  is  no  question  so  vital  to  engineering 
and  kindred  industries  as  that  of  the  fixing  of  piece-work  prices." 
The  firm  tabulates  the  main  difficulties  as  unscientific  price-fixing, 
and  the  absence  of  proper  machinery  for  appeal.  It  has  installed 
a  time  study  office,  where  the  worker  can  study  the  detail  of  the 
calculations.  If  the  worker  is  unconvinced  he  has  the  right  of 
appeal  to  a  committee,  consisting  of  three  of  the  firm's  representa- 
tives, and  three  workmen's  representatives,  who  sit  within  two  days 
of  the  complaint. 

Messrs.  Barr  and  Stroud,  Engineering  Works,  2,350  employees, 
have  two  workers'  committees,  one  a  committee  dealing  with  shop 
amenities;  the  second,  an  industrial  committee,  based  on  trade 
unionism  and  the  shop  steward  system.  The  twelve  representatives 
of  the  workers  are  elected  by  the  forty  shop  stewards  of  the  plant. 
Questions  treated  by  the  industrial  committee  in  the  recent  months 
have  been  the  right  of  the  convenor  of  shop  stewards  to  go  into 
other  departments  for  discussion  of  grievances  (one  of  the  points 
at  issue  in  the  Clyde  dispute,  as  we  saw  in  Chapter  XIV),  wages 
of  women,  the  record  of  changes  in  practice,  the  premium  bonus 
system,  appeals  against  dismissal,  forgetfulness  in  "clocking  on," 
Saturday  overtime,  wages  of  apprentices,  rules  for  night  shift  work. 
Of  this  committee,  the  Ministry  of  Labour  says: — "It  is  one  of  the 
most  advanced  works  committees  in  existence." 

The  H.  O.  Strong  and  Sons  Norfolk  Engineering  Works  report: 


SELF-GOVERNMENT  IN  INDUSTRY  185 

"The  management  have  found  the  committee  of  the  greatest  service 
in  conducting  the  business  of  the  works." 

Such  is  the  experience  of  a  few  out  of  many  employers  who  have 
installed  workers'  committees. 

The  great  Quaker  cocoa  firms,  such  as  the  Cadburys  and  the 
Rowntrees,  have  made  pioneer  applications  of  industrial  democracy 
to  their  plants.  We  give  the  composition  and  the  functions  of  the 
system  of  Rowntree  &  Co.  of  York  in  Appendix  XIV  and  the  high 
ground  taken  by  a  group  of  Quaker  employers  in  Appendix  XIII. 

In  a  district  investigation  in  the  engineering  and  shipbuilding 
industries,  ten  employers  expressed  themselves  in  favor  of  works 
committees,  and  eight  were  opposed.  Of  the  ten  in  favor,  seven  had 
a  works  committee.  Of  the  eight  opposed,  one  had  a  dilution  com- 
mittee, one  a  gunshop  committee,  and  six  had  no  form  of  commit- 
tee. The  reader  who  is  interested  should  obtain  a  pamphlet  from 
the  British  Ministry  of  Labour,  entitled  "Works  Committees,"  where 
reports  on  22  works  committees  in  operation  are  given. 

The  new  social  order  after  the  war  begins  with  several  hundred 
"converted"  employers,  because  many  of  the  5,000  government- 
controlled  factories  were  organized  with  works  committees.  This 
has  been  largely  done  by  Martin  Hall,  of  the  Ministry  of  Munitions. 
The  conception  of  these  workshop  councils  held  by  Hall  (as  devel- 
oped in  an  afternoon  of  talk  with  us)  is  more  modest  than  that  of 
David  Kirkwood  and  J.  T.  Murphy.  Hall's  conception  is  that  of 
a  workers'  grievance  committee,  a  lightning  rod  for  diverting  and 
absorbing  trouble.  But  the  point  is  that  the  establishment  of  such 
committees  (however  restricted  their  scope  in  the  beginning)  is  the 
affirmation  of  a  new  principle  in  industry.  A  principle  once  applied 
does  not  rest  at  its  first  frontiers.  It  extends  itself  out  over  new 
areas,  and  each  gain  is  the  entrenchment  for  a  fresh  push. 

THE   WHITLEY  REPORTS 

The  Whitley  Reports  and  memorandum  of  the  Ministry  of  Re- 
construction are  given  in  Appendices  VII,  VIII,  IX  and  X.  They 
call  for  joint  industrial  councils  representing  management  and  work- 
ers, in  ever-widening  spheres  of  cooperation,  local,  district,  national. 
That  is,  in  the  shop  and  factory,  the  industrial  area,  and  the  trade, 
the  worker  is  to  have  a  share  in  the  management  of  industry.  The 
Whitley  Reports  were  issued  by  a  subcommittee  of  the  Reconstruc- 
tion Committee,  which  later  became  the  Committee  on  Relations 
Between  Employers  and  Employed,  to  the  Ministry  of  Reconstruc- 
tion. This  Whitley  Committee  (as  it  came  to  be  known  because 
of  its  Chairman,  J.  H.  Whitley)  was  composed  of  such  persons  as 


i86  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

F.  S.  Button  (formerly  an  executive  of  the  Amalgamated  Society 
of  Engineers),  J.  R.  Clynes  (later  Food  Controller),  J.  A.  Hobson 
(the  economist),  J.  J.  Mallon  (secretary  of  the  Anti-Sweating 
League),  Sir  G.  J.  Carter,  chairman  of  the  Shipbuilding  Employers' 
Federation,  Sir  Gilbert  Claughton,  chairman  of  the  London  and 
North  Western  Railway  Company,  Sir  Thomas  A.  Ratcliffe-EIlis, 
secretary  of  the  Mining  Association.  Its  recommendations  for  the 
organized  trades  are  voluntary.  This  means  that  the  employers 
and  the  unions  are  not  forced  to  inaugurate  industrial  councils. 

The  matters  to  be  dealt  with  by  these  joint  bodies  of  managers 
and  workers  are  improvements  of  processes,  macljinery,  organization, 
mdustrial  experiments,  the  settlement  of  the  general  principles  gov- 
erning the  conditions  of  employment,  including  the  methods  of  fixing, 
paying  and  adjusting  wages. 

The  Federation  of  British  Industries  accepted  the  recommenda- 
tions of  the  Whitley  Report.  The  Federation  has  124  associations 
and  691  firms  and  individuals,  representing  9,000  firms  in  all. 

The  British  Trades  Union  Congress  of  191 7  with  its  millions  of 
organized  workers  accepted  the  Whitley  Report.  The  Congress  of 
19 18  called  on  the  Government  to  apply  it  to  all  departments  of 
state  service. 

The  original  recommendations  were  clear  enough  for  the  organ- 
ized trades.  Later  this  recommendation  was  made  for  the  sweated 
trades: 

In  industries  having  no  adequate  organization  of  employers  or 
employed,  we  recommend  that  trade  boards  should  be  continued  or 
established. 

That  means  that  a  minimum  wage  shall  be  established  in  these  trades 
by  public  authority  pending  trade  union  organization.  Trade  boards 
are  joint  statutory  bodies  representing  not  only  employers  and  em- 
ployees but  the  public,  set  up  by  the  Minister  of  Labour,  to  fix 
such  minimum  wage  rates,  enforceable  by  law. 

The  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  Trades  Union  Congress  in 
affirming  its  general  acceptance  of  the  Whitley  Reports  makes 
certain  reservations.  Where  well  established  means  exist  for 
negotiation  between  trade  unions  and  employers'  associations,  the 
Parliamentary  Committee  (which  is  the  executive  of  the  congress) 
advises  that  no  effort  should  be  made  by  the  government  to  inter- 
fere with  existing  arrangements.  The  committee  suggests  that, 
wherever  alteration  in  trade  rule  or  custom  may  be  agreed  to  by 
mutual  consent  between  employers'  associations  and  trade  unions, 
the  less  government  interference,  the  better  will  be  the  result  ob- 
tained. 


SELF-GOVERNMENT  IN  INDUSTRY  187 

As  to  works  committees,  the  Parliamentary  Committee  urges  that 
such  committees  shall  not  interfere  with  the  general  questions  affect- 
ing the  working  rules  of  the  trade  respecting  the  hours  of  labor,  rates 
of  wages,  overtime  rates.  "Such  questions  ought  not  to  be  dealt 
with  by  a  process  of  shop  bargaining  as  a  substitute  for  the  col- 
lective bargaining  usually  conducted  by  the  responsible  and  experi- 
enced officials  of  the  unions  on  behalf  of  all  the  workers  employed 
either  in  a  particular  district  or  industry." 

In  short,  the  works  committee  must  be  a  part  of  the  machinery 
of  the  trade  union.  In  a  preceding  chapter  we  saw  the  shop  stew- 
ards committees  fighting  "the  responsible  and  experienced  officials 
of  the  unions."  We  saw  that  their  new  dynamic  is  likely  to  be  har- 
nessed to  the  trade  union.  We  saw  that  this  will  remake  the  struc- 
ture of  the  trade  union.  Clearly,  the  same  process  will  go  on  in 
all  trades  where  the  works  committees  are  set  up.  The  works 
committees  will  be  close  to  the  rank  and  file,  will  be  composed  of 
them  and  elected  by  them.  The  "responsible  and  experienced  offi- 
cials of  the  unions"  must  recognize  them,  and  create  a  functioning 
place  for  them  in  the  organism  of  the  trade  unions. 

As  to  industrial  councils  for  industries  partially  organized,  the 
Parliamentary  Committee  states  that  councils  of  this  kind  shall  not 
be  accepted  as  a  permanent  form  of  joint  activity  to  act  as  sub- 
stitutes for  the  representative  bodies  which  ought  to  exist  for  each 
industry.  Just  as  works  committees  in  organized  industries  must 
not  function  outside  the  trade  union,  so  industrial  councils  in  par- 
tially-organized industries  must  not  carry  on  joint  negotiations  as 
a  final  substitute  for  trade  union  organization  and  for  the  ultimate 
establishment  of  effective  representative  bodies  of  employers  and 
of  trade  unions. 

The  principle  in  these  provisos  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee 
is  that  "the  extent  of  state  assistance  shall  vary  inversely  with  the 
degree  of  organization  in  industries."  Government  assistance  is  not 
an  alternative  to  organic  relations  between  employers  and  employed. 
It  is  a  step  in  that  direction.  As  the  Government's  Reconstruction 
Committee  said: 

An  essential  condition  of  securing  a  permanent  improvement  in 
the  relations  between  employers  and  employed  is  that  there  should 
be  adequate  organization  011  the  part  of  both  employers  and  work- 
people. 

The  proposals  outlined  for  joint  cooperation  throughout  the  sev- 
eral industries  depend  for  their  ultimate  success  upon  there  being 
such  organization  on  both  sides,  and  such  organization  is  necessary 
also  to  provide  means  whereby  the  arrangements  and  agreements 
made  for  the  industry  may  be  effectively  carried  out. 


1 88  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

The  trade  unions  accept  this  as  a  desirable  policy,  but  want  it 
to  stop  there.    To  quote  the  Parliamentary  Committee's  report: 

With  permanent  and  direct  intervention  of  government  officials 
on  joint  industrial  councils  appointed  to  deal  with  the  detail  rela- 
tions of  employers  and  employees  we  have  no  sympathy.  State 
assistance  may,  however,  take  another  form.  The  government  may 
by  a  strict  enforcement  of  the  Fair  Wages  Clause  improve  the  status 
of  many  industries. 

In  short,  the  government  can  bring  sweated  industries  up  to 
the  level  where  they  become  organized  industries.  Then  organized 
labor  prefers  to  talk  directly  with  the  employers  and  rely  on  the 
developing  machinery  of  the  trade  unions  to  safeguard  themselves; 
the  union  and  the  employers'  associations  forming  their  own  joint 
industrial  councils.^ 

But  was  the  government  prepared  to  swallow  its  own  medicine? 
Was  it  ready  to  install  workers'  control  in  the  public  services? 
Bonar  Law  said  that  it  had  been  decided  to  adopt  in  principle  the 
application  of  the  Whitley  Report  to  Government  Departments,  and 
an  Inter-Departmental  Committee,  presided  over  by  the  Minister 
of  Labour,  had  been  appointed  to  consider  what  modifications  were 
necessary.  This  applied  to  the  Post  Office,  the  Railways,  and  the 
dockyard  employees. 

The  Ministry  of  Labour  announced: 

Committees  mean  discussion;  discussion  takes  time;  and  from 
this  point  of  view  it  is  sometimes  argued  that  a  Works  Committee 
may  tend  to  slow  down  the  pace  of  industry;  and,  again,  that  it  may 
be  difficult  to  convince  a  committee  of  the  value  or  the  feasibility 
of  a  new  idea  or  process,  so  that  the  way  of  innovation  may  be 
somewhat  impeded.  These  are  theoretical  objections.  In  practice 
Works  Committees — the  evidence  would  suggest — have  improved 
time-keeping  and  increased  output,  ...  In  practice,  again,  they  have 
been  the  opposite  of  conservative,  and  instead  of  checking  change 
they  have  themselves  suggested  change.  .  .  .  They  make  for  better 
relations  and  greater  harmony,  and  these  are  the  things  that  matter 
most  to  industry.  More  time  is  gained  by  the  absence  of  disputes 
than  is  lost  by  the  presence  of  discussion. 

^  Self-government  in  industry  clearly  precludes  autocratic  interference 
or  domination  by  the  state ;  but  between  that  and  the  complete  exclusion 
of  the  public  from  industrial  control  is  a  wide  gulf.  The  three-fold  mem- 
bership in  the  trade  boards  is  not  duplicated  in  the  Whitley  councils  and, 
as  we  .shall  see,  the  relative  competence  of  the  two  systems  in  safeguard- 
ing not  only  the  workers  but  the  community  is  under  discussion.  The 
propensity  of  the  government  to  set  up  Whitley  committees  in  weakly 
organized  trades  is  criticized  by  J.  J.  Mallon,  secretary  of  the  Anti-Sweat- 
ing League,  as  prejudicial  to  the  unorganized  workers.  [See  The  Toynbee 
Record,  November,  1918.] 


SELF-GOVERNMENT  IN  INDUSTRY  189 

B,  Seebohm  Rowntree,  a  constructive  leader  of  the  new  industrial 
statesmanship,  said  to  us  that  the  shop  committee  takes  the  time  of 
twelve  persons  in  deciding  what  one  person  used  to  decide,  but  that 
the  fact  that  twelve  persons  decided  it  was  a  democratic  gain.  He 
was  referring  to  his  own  shop  committees. 

The  firm  of  Messrs.  Reuben  Gaunt  &  Sons,  Spinners  and  Manu- 
facturers, of  Forsley,  Yorkshire,  report  of  their  works  committees : 

Democratic  control  of  industry  can  only  come  when  democracy 
has  knowjedge  and  wisdom  to  assume  control.  Rightly  used,  con- 
ferences will  provide  the  necessary  experience  and  education  for 
greater  responsibility.  The  two  principal  factors  in  the  organiza- 
tion of  human  beings  are  the  spirit  and  the  machinery.  In  suc- 
cessful cooperation  the  spirit  is  more  potent  than  the  machinery. 
Mental  attitude  is  of  greater  consequence  than  mental  capacity. 
Notwithstanding  this,  the  machinery  is  usually  the  only  factor  which 
is  accepted  consciously  and  considered  in  a  scientific  way. 

To  speak  precisely,  the  shop  committee  covers  a  particular  de- 
partment or  shop  in  a  works.  The  works  committee  covers  the 
whole  of  a  works,  and  may  be  industrial,  welfare,  or  social.  The 
district  council  bears  much  the  same  relation  to  a  works  committee, 
as  a  works  committee  does  to  the  shop  committee.  The  district 
council  covers  all  works  in  an  industrial  area  in  a  particular  industry; 
and  matters  which  it  is  unable  to  resolve  are  in  turn  carried  up  to 
the  national  councils. 

By  April,  19 18,  the  Parliamentary  Secretary  to  the  Ministry  of 
Labour  [Bridgeman]  stated  in  the  House  of  Commons  that  the 
Whitley  Report  had  been  circulated  to  the  trade  unions  and  em- 
ployers' associations  in  all  industries  to  which  its  recommendations 
were  applicable.  Negotiations  were  then  taking  place  in  26  indus- 
tries, covering  3,000,000  workpeople.  In  twelve  of  these  industries, 
covering  2,000,000  workpeople,  joint  subcommittees  were  already 
engaged  in  drawing  up  schemes  for  industrial  councils,  and  in  five 
of  these  industries  final  agreement  upon  the  actual  constitution  had 
been  practically  reached.  In  the  case  of  one  industry — pottery — a 
National  Joint  Industrial  Council  had  been  set  up.     [Appendix  XL] 

The  Whitley  Committee,  Bridgeman  added,  threw  the  responsi- 
bility for  establishing  these  councils  entirely  on  the  existing  organiza- 
tions, and  the  government  had  neither  the  intention  nor  the  wish  to 
force  the  new  organization  on  unwilling  industries. 

On  July  5,  1918,  Bridgeman  made  pubHc  this  statement: — 

Two  joint  industrial  councils  for  the  pottery  and  building  indus- 
tries, respectively,  have  already  held  their  first  meetings.  Joint 
industrial  councils  have  also  been  constituted  for  the  heavy  chem- 


190  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

icals,  gold,  silver,  and  kindred  trades,  rubber  and  silk  industries, 
and  the  first  meetings  of  these  councils  will  be  held  during  July. 

As  a  result  of  conferences,  called  as  a  rule  by  the  Minister, 
considerable  progress  has  been  made  in  the  following  eight  indus- 
tries :  Baking,  cable-making,  commercial  road  transport,  electrical 
contracting,  furniture  manufacture,  leather  goods  and  belting, 
matches,  and  vehicle  building.  Provisional  committees  have  been 
appointed  and  have  drafted  constitutions  which  have  been  sent  out 
to  the  various  associations  concerned  for  their  approval.  A  consti- 
tution for  the  printing  industry  has  been  drafted,  but  has  not  yet 
been  sent  out  to  the  associations  concerned  for  approval* 

As  soon  as  the  constitutions  have  been  approved  by  the  various 
associations,  the  first  meetings  of  the  councils  will  be  arranged. 

In  the  case  of  the  following  five  industries,  conferences  have 
already  taken  place  and  have  approved  of  the  drafting  of  consti- 
tutions: Bobbin  manufacture,  boot  and  shoe  manufacture,  elec- 
tricity (power  and  supply),  roller  engraving,  and  woollen  and 
worsted. 

In  the  case  of  some  20  other  industries  the  associations  concerned 
are  giving  careful  consideration  to  the  question  of  the  formation 
of  a  joint  industrial  council,  and  in  some  of  them  arrangements 
have  been  made   for  summoning  joint  conferences. 

George  R.  Roberts,  Minister  of  Labour,  reported  on  August  24, 
191 8,  that  9  councils  were  in  existence,  19  in  process  of  formation, 
and  20  in  other  trades  in  preliminary  conferences.  At  the  close  of 
1918,  so  rapid  had  been  the  movement,  he  could  report: 

National  joint  industrial  councils  have  been  established  and  have 
held  one  or  more  full  council  meetings  in  the  following  (twenty) 
industries,  namely,  baking,  bedsteads,  bobbins,  building,  chemical 
trade,  china,  clay,  furniture,  gold,  silver,  horological  and  allied 
trades,  hosiery,  leather  goods,  matches,  paint  and  varnish,  pot- 
tery, rubber,  silk,  vehicle  building,  woolen  and  worsted  (Scot- 
tish section).  In  the  case  of  each  of  these  councils  the  mem- 
bers are  showing  considerable  eagerness  to  get  to  grips  with  the 
important  reconstruction  and  other  problems  which  are  facing  their 
industries  and  very  satisfactory  progress  has  already  been  made  in 
many  directions.  In  four  other  industries,  namely,  municipalities 
(iron-trading  services),  waterworks,  saw-milling,  and  surgical  in- 
struments, the  dates  for  the  first  meeting  of  these  councils  have  been 
fixed.  Twelve  other  industries,  namely,  boot  and  shoe,  cable-making, 
commercial  road  transport,  electrical  contracting,  electricity  (power 
and  supply),  needles  and  fish-hooks,  newspapers,  paper-making, 
printing,  roller  engraving,  tin  mining,  woolen  and  worsted,  have  al- 
ready established  provisional  committees  to  draw  up  constitutions  for 
joint  industrial  councils,  and  the  proceedings  have  reached  an  ad- 
vanced stage  in  many  of  these  cases.     In  a  number  of  other  indus- 


SELF-GOVERNMENT  IN  INDUSTRY  191 

tries  the  Ministry  of  Labour  is  giving  assistance  in  setting  up  coun- 
cils. The  government  have  approved  a  scheme  deaHng  with  the 
application  of  the  Whitley  report  to  the  industrial  establishment  of 
the  government,  and  immediate  steps  are  being  taken  to  place  the 
scheme  before  the  trade  unions  and  departments  concerned.  A  sub- 
committee of  the  interdepartmental  committee  on  the  application  of 
the  Whitley  Report  to  government  establishments  is  considering  the 
question  of  its  application  to  the  clerical  and  administrative  classes 
of  the  civil  service.  Arrangements  have  been  made  for  hearing  evi- 
dence from  representatives  of  civil  service  associations. 

An  official  leaflet  has  recently  'been  issued  entitled  ''Industrial 
Councils:  The  Recommendations  of  the  Whitley  Report,"  which 
gives  an  outline  of  the  principal  recommendations  of  the  report,  in 
order  that  they  may  be  made  as  widely  known  as  possible  among 
the  members  of  employers'  and  workpeople's  associations.  The  sec- 
tions of  the  leaflet  dealing  with  "Industrial  Councils  and  the  Gov- 
ernment" and  "The  Need  for  Industrial  Councils"  are  as  follows: 

Industrial  Councils  and  the  Government 

The  primary  object  of  Lidustrial  Councils  then  is  to  regularize 
the  relations  between  employers  and  employed.  But  they  will  serve 
another  urgent  need  and,  in  so  doing,  will  give  to  workpeople  a 
status  in  their  respective  industries  that  they  have  not  had  hitherto. 
There  is  a  large  body  of  problems  which  belong  both  to  industry 
and  to  politics. 

They  belong  to  politics,  because  the  community  is  responsible 
for  their  solution  and  the  state  must  act  as  if  no  other  provision 
is  made;  they  belong  to  industry,  because  they  can  be  solved  only 
by  the  knowledge  and  experience  of  the  people  actually  engaged  in 
industry.  Such  problems  are  the  regularization  of  employment, 
industrial  training,  utilization  of  inventions,  industrial  research,  the 
improvement  of  designs  and  quality,  legislation  affecting  workshop 
conditions — all  of  them  questions  which  have  hitherto  been  left  in 
the  main  to  employers,  but  which  in  reality  constitute  an  important 
common  interest  on  the  basis  of  which  all  engaged  in  an  industry 
can  meet.  The  termination  of  the  war  will  bring  with  it  a  mass 
of  new  problems  of  this  nature;  for  example,  demobilization,  the 
training"  of  apprentices  whose  apprenticeship  was  interrupted  by 
military  service,  the  settlement  in  industry  of  partially  disabled 
men,  and,  in  general,  the  reconversion  of  industry  to  the  purposes 
of  peace.  It  is  urgently  necessary  that  the  government  should  be 
able  to  obtain  without  delay  the  experience  and  views  of  the  people 
actually  in  industry  on  all  these  questions.  It  proposes,  therefore, 
to  treat  Industrial  Councils  as  Standing  Consultative  Committees  to 
the  government  and  the  normal  channel  through  which  it  will  seek 
the  experience  and  advice  of  industries.  Further,  many  of  these 
problems  can  be  handled  by  each  industry  by  itself,  provided  that 


192  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

it  has  an  organization  representative  of  all  sections  and  interests 
within  it.  The  establishment  of  Industrial  Councils  will,  therefore, 
make  unnecessary  a  large  amount  of  "government  interference," 
which  is  at  present  unavoidable,  and  substitute  for  it  a  real  meas- 
ure of  "self-government"  in  industry. 

The  Need  for  Industrial  Councils 

While  there  is  no  doubt  that  every  industry  has  problems  which 
can  be  solved  only  if  the  experience  of  every  grade  and  section  of 
the  industry  is  brought  to  bear  on  them,  hitherto  the  tendency  has 
been  for  every  grade  and  section  to  go  its  own  way.  Whenever  the 
government  wishes  to  ascertain  the  needs  and  opinions  of  an  indus- 
try, instead  of  one  organization  speaking  with  a  single  voice,  a 
dozen  organizations  speak  with  a  dozen  voices.  The  different  sec- 
tions and  interests  are  organized  and  can  put  their  point  of  view; 
the  industry  as  a  whole  has  no  representative  organization,  so  that 
the  general  interest  of  the  industry  may  be  overlooked.  Sectional 
interests  often  conflict ;  there  is  no  need  for  example  to  disguise 
the  conflict  of  interests  between  employers  and  employed ;  and  the 
Whitley  Report  proposes  nothing  of  the  nature  of  compulsory 
arbitration,  nothing  that  will  limit  or  interfere  with  the  right  to 
lockout  or  strike.  But  no  one  in  industry  wants  an  unnecessary 
stoppage ;  these  can  be  prevented  only  by  the  representatives  of 
conflicting  interests  meeting  to  thrash  out  their  differences;  and 
all  the  problems  that  will  face  industry  after  the  war  call  for  con- 
tinuous consultation  and  cooperation  of  all  sections,  grades,  and 
interests.  For  every  reason,  therefore,  industrial  councils,  fully 
representative  of  all  sections  and  interests  in  each  industry,  are  an 
urgent   necessity. 

In  some  industries  there  exist  already  joint  conciliation  boards 
performing  some  of  the  functions  of  industrial  councils.  These  are, 
however,  as  a  rule,  limited  either  in  the  work  they  undertake  or 
in  the  sections  of  the  industry  which  they  represent.  Although, 
therefore,  existing  joint  boards  will  in  many  cases  provide  the  basis 
for  industrial  councils,  they  cannot  handle  the  problems,  referred  to 
above,  with  which  the  industries  of  the  country  will  be  faced  after 
the  war.  What  is  needed  is  an  organization  representing  the  whole 
industry  and  capable  of  speaking  for  all  the  firms  and  all  the  work- 
people employed  in  it.  The  government's  adoption  of  the  Whitley 
Report  is  simply  an  invitation  to  the  industries  of  the  country  to 
organize  themselves  in  this  way,  for  their  own  benefit  and  for  the 
benefit  of  the  community. 

To  summarize  Part  IV:  we  have  shown  the  movement  toward 
workers'  control  manifested  in  spontaneous  action  by  the  workers 
themselves  through  the  shop  stewards,  the  railwaymen,  the  miners, 
the  higher  officials  of  the  engineers,  and  others.  We  have  shown 
it  furthered  by  progressive  employers,  such  as  Renold,  and  Rown- 


SELF-GOVERNMENT  IN  INDUSTRY  193 

tree.  We  have  shown  the  government  promoting  it  in  the  con- 
trolled munitions  factories,  in  the  civil  service  and  through  the 
Whitley  Reports. 

It  remains  to  be  brought  out  that  the  area  over  which  these 
going  experiments  operate  is  the  area  of  workshop  and  factory  con- 
ditions and  processes.  But  the  area  of  production  is  vastly  wider 
than  this.  The  democratic  government  of  the  factory  is  not  self- 
government  in  industry.  It  is  a  first  step.  British  industrial  history 
of  the  next  fifty  years  will  be  concerned  with  larger  applications. 
The  control  of  workshop  conditions  and  processes  is  not  control 
of  the  product.    As  Cole  says: 

Capitalist  control  of  the  product  has  three  principal  aspects.  It 
is  expressed  in  the  firDancial  system  by  which  the  great  investors  and 
syndicates  regulate  the  flo'  of  capital;  in  the  control  of  raw  mate- 
rials— buying,  and  in  the  '    .itrol  of  the  finished  product — selling. 

As  a  war  measure  the  ontrol  Board  in  the  Woollen  and  Worsted 
Industries  determined  the  allocation  of  the  wool  available  for  the 
civilian  trade,  and  regulated  the  hours  and  conditions  of  working. 
This  Board  of  Control  consisted  of  thirty-three  members,  eleven 
nominated  by  the  War  Office,  eleven  by  the  employers'  associations, 
eleven  by  the  trade  unions.  An  Order  in  Council  defined  the  powers 
of  the  board.  Thus  the  distribution  of  raw  material  as  well  as  labor 
conditions  passed  under  collective  democratic  control.  A  loosely 
organized  private  industry  has  been  lifted  to  the  level  of  a  respon- 
sible national  service  under  the  mutual  economic  government  of 
employers,  employees  and  the  public. 

In  the  spring  of  19 18,  Dr.  Addison  (then  Minister  of  Reconstruc- 
tion) called  a  meeting  of  Associations  of  Employers  and  Trade 
Unions  in  the  saddlery,  harness  and  equipment,  light  leather  goods, 
and  belting  industries.  He  said  he  wished  to  receive  suggestions  for 
"a  joint  council  about  raw  material  requirements." 

The  Cotton  Control  Board  in  Lancashire  has  21  members,  rep- 
resenting the  spinners  and  manufacturers,  cotton  associations,  a 
Chamber  of  Commerce,  the  Board  of  Trade,  and  the  trade  unions. 
It  has  power  to  fix  the  price  daily.  George  A.  Greenwood  in  the 
English  World's  Work  for  December,  19 18,  says  that  these  woollen 
and  cotton  boards  show  that 

the  government  may  claim  as  a  function  the  protection  of  the  larger 
mass  of  consumers  from  either  cornering  or  profiteering  on  the  part 
of  the  smaller  body  of  producers.  Employers,  guaranteed  their  fair 
share  of  raw  material,  may  be  told  at  what  they  must  sell.  Not  less 
important  is  the  establishment  in  practice  of  the  right  of  the  trade 
unions  to  a  voice  in  the  control  of  industry. 


194  WORKERS'  CONTROL 

The  Ministry  of  Labour  states  that  one  of  the  questions  where 

the  government  will  need  the  united  and  considered  opinion  of 
each  large  industry  (management  and  workers)  is  the  control  of 
raw  materials.  The  councils  will  be  recognized  as  the  official  stand- 
ing consultative  committees  to  the  government.  It  is  intended  that 
industrial  councils  should  play  a  definite  and  permanent  part  in  the 
economic  life  of  the  country. 

Thus  the  area  of  self-government  in  industry  widens.  The  old 
order  of  autocratic  management  is  passing.  The  new  order  of  indus- 
trial democracy  begins  slowly,  painfully,  to  be  established. 


The  forces  at  work  at  the  elbow  of  every  British  wage  earner  are 
now  before  us;  forces  which  reacted  cumulatively  upon  the  war 
time  development  of  the  political  labor  movement  (as  interpreted 
in  Part  III);  and  impelled  both  the  economic  and  political  arms 
of  the  movement — the  Trades  Union  Congress  and  the  Labour  Party 
— to  claim  a  hearing  for  the  workers  in  war  and  in  peace  and  to 
reach  out  toward  corresponding  groups  in  other  countries  (as  inter- 
preted in  Parts  I  and  II).  In  Part  V,  we  shall  follow  these  various 
strands  of  interest  throughout  1918 — economic,  political,  inter-Al- 
lied, international — and  endeavor  to  throw  light  on  the  relation 
borne  toward  them  by  American  labor  and  the  American  Republic, 
both  of  which  might  be  presupposed  to  be  sympathetic  toward  the 
struggle  for  democracy  of  the  mother  country  at  home  as  well  as  in 
the  field. 


PART  V 
THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 


CHAPTER  XVII 

THE  JUBILEE  YEAR  OF  THE  BRITISH  TRADES  UNION  CONGRESS 

If  an  unsophisticated  citizen  of  the  United  States  had  arrived 
in  Derby  on  September  i,  191 8,  or  thereabouts,  he  would  have  spent 
the  first  hours  of  his  visit  asking  questions.  He  would  have  wanted 
to  know  why  it  was  that,  with  paper  at  famine  prices,  leaflets  were 
falling  on  delegates  like  "blessed  rain  from  Heaven,"  He  would 
have  wanted  to  know  why  it  was  that  the  head  of  the  Sailors'  and 
Firemen's  Union  should  erect  a  large  marquee  in  the  Market  Square 
and  invite  all  who  cared  to  do  so  to  take  lunch  with  him  without 
charge.  He  would  have  wanted  to  know  what  the  prime  minister 
of  Australia  was  doing  at  this  lunch  (besides  eating  his  share  of 
it)  and  why,  himself  a  labor  leader,  he  should  go  out  of  his  way 
to  revile  ideals  which  generations  of  working  men  in  all  countries 
had  agreed  to  keep  sacred. 

He  would  have  wanted  to  know  why,  if  the  leaders  of  British 
trades  unionism  thought  it  proper  to  boycott  this  lunch,  veteran 
Samuel  Gompers,  whom,  as  representing  the  United  States,  every- 
body delighted  to  honor,  thought  it  proper  to  be  present  at  it.  He 
might  even  have  wanted  to  know  who  paid  for  the  lunch,  and  whether 
the  function  of  a  brass  band,  which  made  much  noise  during  the 
proceedings,  was  to  conceal  the  paucity  of  applause  called  forth 
by  the  somewhat  acidulous  eloquence  of  Premier  Hughes. 

"It  would  not  be  possible  to  answer  all  the  questions  of  such  a 
visitor,"  wrote  a  British  correspondent  to  The  Survey,  "but  one 
might  tell  him  in  general  terms  that  the  trade  union  world  was 
increasing  its  power  and  prestige  by  leaps  and  bounds;  that  it  now 
numbered  nearly  five  million  adherents,  including  three-quarters  of 
a  million  women,  and  that  the  inrush  was  continuing  and  quickening; 
that  all  but  a  few  of  these  members  would  have  votes  under  the 
Representation  of  the  People  Act,  and  that,  in  consequence,  the 
poHtical  power  of  the  unions  would  also  be  increased  and  might,  in 
the  future,  be  decisive;  that  this  prospect  was  leading  to  many  at- 
tempts to  'nobble'  labor  and  would  probably  produce  an  epidemic  of 
free  lunches,  at  most  of  which  the  prime  minister  of  Australia  (who 
had  become  so  devoted  to  the  British  Islands  that  he  had  apparently 
forgotten  his  own)  might  be  expected  to  be  present.    As  for  Samuel 

197 


198  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

Gompers,  one  would  say  that  after  all  he  had  not  spoken  as  fero- 
ciously as  our  yellow  press  had  led  us  to  expect  him  to  do;  that 
doubtless  he  had  failed  as  yet  accurately  to  take  his  bearings  and 
that  when  he  had  done  so,  his  native  acumen  would  probably  lead 
him  to  select  his  luncheon  parties  with  greater  care. 

"And  with  this  prelude  one  would  leave  the  visitor  to  enter 
the  congress  in  the  sure  hope  that  with  open  eyes  and  ears  he 
could  not  fail  to  arrive  at  just  conclusions." 

It  is  as  little  possible  as  it  is  desirable  to  refer  to  all  the  reso- 
lutions adopted  by  this  fifth  annual  meeting  in  war-time  of  the 
British  Trades  Union  Congress,  this  fiftieth  since  its  founding.  The 
address  of  the  chairman  and  the  subsequent  debates  gave  chief 
place  to  questions  we  shall  explore  in  this  and  succeeding  chapters, 
such  questions  as  the  dispute  on  passports,  the  attempts  to  form  a 
purely  trade  union  political  party,  the  antagonisms  which  threatened 
to  separate  the  congress  from  the  Labour  Party  on  the  one  hand 
and  from  the  General  Federation  of  Trades  Unions  on  the  other, 
the  question  most  of  all  of  the  war  policy  of  British  labor; — the 
relation  to  these  questions  of  the  American  labor  leadership. 

If  ever  modesty,  sincerity  and  disinterestedness  spoke  out  of 
the  mouth  of  a  man  it  spoke  out  of  the  mouth  of  J.  W.  Ogden. 
Ogden  is  not  a  lion  of  the  world  of  labor,  but  he  is  endeared  to  it 
by  qualities  of  the  head  and  the  heart.  Lancashire  weavers,  of 
whom  he  is  one,  are  said  to  say  little  and  think  a  lot.  That  cer- 
tainly is  Ogden's  way.  One  feels  in  listening  to  him  that  he  talks 
merely  because  he  has  something  imperative  to  say.  And  again 
like  the  weavers,  he  abhors  rhetoric  or  any  type  or  degree  of  over- 
emphasis or  exaggeration.  In  his  address  to  the  congress  appeared 
the  candor  and  exactitude  of  his  mind  and  the  care,  even  the  pains, 
with  which  he  had  worked  his  way  to  convictions. 

Havelock  Wilson  and  his  colleagues  have  never  loved  the  polit- 
ical Labour  Party,  and  now,  aided  by  Hughes  and  some  scores  of 
camp  followers,  they  were  seeking  under  various  pretenses  to  dis- 
rupt it.  Ogden,  without  mentioning  them,  sent  a  heavy  censure 
in  their  direction.  Experience  had  taught  him  that  unless  working 
men  act  together  in  politics  they  cannot  act  together  successfully 
in  industry. 

On  another  subject,  that  of  the  struggle  threatening  to  become 
bitter  between  craft  and  industrial  unions,  Ogden  had  something 
to  say  of  interest  to  American  labor  organizers.  Between  the  con- 
flicting claims  of  these  types  of  union,  the  Parliamentary  Commit- 
tee of  the  British  Congress  has  some  jurisdiction,  but  it  is  not 
enough  to  enable  it  to  penetrate  the  tangle  of  overlapping  federa- 
tions,  confederations   and   amalgamations   and    the   interests   and 


JUBILEE  YEAR  199 

jealousies  that  have  grown  up  in  these.  The  policy  of  President 
Ogden  was  one  that  might  be  derided  if  its  author  were  less  expe- 
rienced, sober  and  shrewd — the  proposal  of  one  all-embracing  trade 
union  within  which,  with  expert  help,  the  wage-earners  might  place 
themselves  in  their  natural  logical  groups. 

But  it  was  on  the  overhanging  issues  of  war  and  peace  that 
Ogden's  speech  was  of  most  effect.  That  there  was  any  weakening 
in  the  determination  of  the  British  democracy  to  attain  the  objects 
for  which  the  nation  entered  the  war,  or  any  attempt  (in  dealing 
with  the  labor  movement  in  enemy  countries)  to  trespass  on  the 
functions  of  central  government,  he  denied.  The  labor  movement, 
however,  had  the  power  to  render  moral  support  to  the  armies 
that  fight  for  democracy  as  it  had  the  duty  to  assist  mankind  to 
achieve  righteousness  and  peace.  The  "awful  work"  of  the  sword 
had  been  done  for  four  years  and  was  still  to  do.  Labor  could  no 
longer  be  supine.  Ogden  stood,  therefore,  for  conference  while  war 
was  on  between  the  several  labor  movements,  not  to  negotiate  a 
peace,  which  is  a  function  of  central  government,  but  to  exchange 
views,  remove  misunderstandings  and  perhaps  show  governments 
the  way  to  reunite  humanity  over  the  chasm  in  which  its  youth 
and  happiness  had  been  rapidly  perishing.  "Godspeed  to  the  Inter- 
national," cried  Ogden,  and  the  solemn  audience  all  but  echoed 
"Amen." 

This  weaver's  speech,  in  which  any  one  who  desired  to  might 
find  the  heart  of  British  labor  laid  bare,  prepared  the  way  for  a 
discussion  on  peace  in  which  the  standing  committee  submitted  a 
resolution.  The  resolution  (page  264)  reaffirmed  the  demand  of  the 
Blackpool  congress  twelve  months  earlier  for  an  international  con- 
ference, requested  the  labor  parties  of  the  Central  Powers  to  table 
their  answer  to  the  war  aims  memorandum  drawn  seven  months 
earlier  by  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference  at 
London  and  called  upon  the  government  to  open  negotiations  as 
soon  as  the  enemy,  voluntarily  or  by  compulsion,  evacuated  France 
and  Belgium.  It  lost  nothing  by  being  committed  to  J.  H.  Thomas. 
Americans  are  acquainted  with  his  buoyant  and  virile  personality. 
His  present  commanding  place  in  labor  politics  is  due  as  much 
to  his  insight  and  generalship  as  to  his  extraordinary  energy  and 
staying  power.  It  owes  a  little  also  to  the  sense  of  fun  which 
made  him  during  the  congress  a  thorn  in  the  flesh  of  Havelock 
Wilson  and  the  destroyer  of  most  of  that  gentleman's  platitudes. 
At  a  great  open-air  "pro-Ally  demonstration,"  Thomas  turned  up 
in  the  audience,  and,  after  Havelock  Wilson  had  uttered  his  usual 
plea  for  a  five  years'  boycott  of  Germany,  went  on  to  the  platform 
ostensibly  to  support  that  proposition.     Poor  Wilson's  face  grew 


200  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

longer  as  the  speech  of  his  supporter  proceeded.  At  the  end  of 
the  meeting  when  the  crowd  had  forgotten  the  "boycott"  and  were 
cheering  rapturously  for  a  league  of  nations,  it  would  have  made 
an  inimitable  "Melancholia." 

Later  at  the  Congress  when  the  boycott  resolution  did  duty 
once  again  and  Wilson  buttressed  it  with  a  sweeping  attack  on 
internationalism  and  "peace  by  negotiation,"  Thomas  made  the 
hit  of  the  week  by  reading  a  quotation  from  which  it  appeared 
that  Wilson  himself,  at  a  conference  of  his  union  subsequent  to 
the  sinking  of  the  Lusitania,  had  resisted  "from  an  international 
point  of  view"  substantially  the  very  resolution  that  he  was  now 
intemperately  supporting. 

Moving  the  peace  resolution,  Thomas  added  to  his  successes 
in  a  speech  of  unusual  dignity  and  power  illumined  by  a  declara- 
tion that  British  labor  would  not  "sacrifice  one  life  to  add  a  yard  to 
the  territory  of  the  empire"  and  by  a  demand  that  the  Allies  should 
state  their  terms  once  and  for  all  so  these  would  not  change  with 
the  war  map  as  did  the  terms  of  the  Germans.  Here  again  Wilson 
was  an  obscurantist,  and  though  the  resolution  was  in  the  nature 
of  a  compromise  between  the  dominant  groups  in  the  congress,  he 
struck  at  it  viciously.  His  friends  in  other  tussles,  however,  lightly 
abandoned  him  in  this,  and  the  resolution  was  adopted  with  prac- 
tical unanimity.     [See  Chapter  XXL] 

Peace  was  again  the  theme  when  a  day  later  delegates  from 
the  United  States  and  Canada  and  from  the  British  Labour  Party 
brought  to  the  congress  the  fraternal  greetings  of  their  organiza- 
tions. Samuel  Gompers  (the  lunch  forgotten)  was  naturally  hero 
of  this  occasion  and  was  given  an  ovation  as  a  patriarch  of  labor, 
such  as  any  leader  might  treasure.  His  speech,  as  well  as  his  pres- 
ence, was  cheered.  British  democracy  counts  association  with 
America  as  the  biggest  event  not  only  of  the  war  but  of  modern 
history,  and  Gompers  could  not  too  often  refer  to  it.  The  Boer 
War  and  Home  Rule  are  less  easy  themes,  but  on  neither  of  them 
did  the  veteran  speak  too  strongly  for  the  taste  of  his  audience. 
British  labor  does  not  equivocate  either  on  Ireland  or  South  Africa, 
and  it  would  gladly  concede  to  these  peoples  the  right  it  is  assert- 
ing for  others. 

Henderson,  who  followed  Gompers,  frankly  admitted  that  the 
British  and  American  labor  organizations  were  not  in  accord  on 
the  proposed  international  labor  conference.  Their  aims  were, 
however,  identical,  and  the  difference  in  method  might  be  min- 
imized or  removed  at  the  forthcoming  Allied  Labour  Conference  in 
London.  Henderson  in  resounding  sentences  came  near  to  repeat- 
ing his  great  triumph  of  twelve  months  before.     He  was  stirring 


JUBILEE  YEAR  201 

in  repudiating  any  aspersions  on  the  determination  of  British  labor, 
stirring  in  glorifying  the  crusade  which  the  two  nations  were  pur- 
suing together  against  imperialism,  stirring  most  of  all  in  proclaim- 
ing the  beneficence  of  the  sovereignty  soon  to  be  wielded  by  a 
league  of  nations. 

Henderson  left  these  capital  questions  for  a  moment  to  strike 
obliquely  at  the  proposal  to  form  a  separate  trade  union  political 
party.  It  should  be  noted  that  those  who  initiated  this  proposal 
were  chiefly  trade  union  leaders  who  in  the  past  had  denied  the 
necessity  for  any  political  labor  party  at  all.  Havelock  Wilson 
and  W.  J.  Davis,  for  example,  are  ancient  members  of  the  Liberal 
Party  whose  attitude  to  labor  candidates  was  from  the  start  one 
of  consistent  hostility.  Their  case  against  the  British  Labour 
Party  was  then  that  it  was  too  narrow  and  sectarian;  now,  that 
the  party  had  altered  its  constitution  and  admits  individual  mem- 
bers who  subscribe  to  the  party  objects  as  well  as  those  who  come 
in  indirectly  as  members  of  trade  unions  or  socialist  organizations. 
The  party  is  too  wide!  Davis  expressed  horror  that  out  of  four 
labor  candidates  adopted  for  Birmingham,  one  was  a  lawyer  and 
two  were  doctors — without  understanding  that  the  precise  object 
of  enlarging  the  scope  of  the  party  was  to  bring  into  it  men  of  the 
professional  classes  exactly  as  such  men  are  brought  into  the  social- 
ist and  labor  parties  on  the  continent.  The  debate  soon  betrayed 
its  unreality  and  showed  Wilson  making  one  more  attempt  for 
some  obscure  purpose  of  his  own,  to  frustrate  the  hopes  which 
the  new  Labour  Party  was  inspiring  in  all  parts  of  the  United 
Kingdom.  That  the  congress  knew  how  to  reward  his  plotting  was 
shown  by  a  contemptuous  dismissal  of  the  resolution.  [See  Chap- 
ter XXL] 

The  quarrel  between  the  General  Federation  of  Trade  Unions 
and  the  combined  Labour  Party  and  Trades  Union  Congress  grew 
out  of  the  lethargy  of  the  last  named  body  in  the  realm  of  interna- 
tional affairs.  On  the  other  hand,  the  federation's  activity  achieved 
a  prominence  abroad  unsupported  either  by  the  membership  of  the 
federation  or  the  part  accredited  it  in  the  British  trade  union 
scheme.  The  original  function  of  the  federation  was  to  facilitate 
the  insurance  of  unions  against  the  heavy  liabilities  of  strikes. 
Insofar  as  it  goes  beyond  this  function,  it  collides  with  the  Trades 
Union  Congress,  which  is  generally  recognized  as  the  body  entitled 
to  pronounce  on  industrial  issues,  or  with  the  Labour  Party  which 
similarly  has  held  jurisdiction  in  political  affairs.  The  confusion 
between  these  bodies  led,  after  his  arrival  and  before,  to  a  struggle 
for  the  body  of  Samuel  Gompers,  Appleton  of  the  federation  and 
Bowerman  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  Trades  Union 


202  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

Congress  busily  arranging  conferences  for  the  distinguished  visitor 
that  conflicted  with  each  other.     [See  Chapters  XIX  and  XXII.] 

The  question  of  passports  raised  the  congress  to  much  indigna- 
tion. Even  delegates  who  could  see  a  certain  reason  in  the  refusal 
to  permit  British  labor  leaders  to  meet  or  treat  with  members  of 
enemy  countries,  could  see  none  at  all  in  the  denial  of  a 
passport  to  enable  their  elected  representative,  Margaret  Bondfield, 
to  transmit  their  greetings  to  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 
They  resented,  too,  the  hypocrisy  of  the  denial.  Admitting  that 
a  war  regulation  prohibited  women  and  children  from  traveling 
overseas  save  in  cases  of  exceptional  and  urgent  necessity,  they 
pointed  out  that  the  regulation  had  been  waived  in  the  case  of 
Mrs.  Pankhurst.  Why  was  the  government  more  solicitous  for 
the  safety  of  Miss  Bondfield  than  for  that  of  Mrs.  Pankhurst,  or, 
alternately,  in  what  was  the  business  of  Mrs.  Pankhurst,  who  repre- 
sented nobody  but  herself,  more  "exceptional  and  urgent"  than  the 
business  of  Miss  Bondfield,  the  representative  of  wage-earners  num- 
bered in  millions? 

It  was  with  justice  that  delegates  alleged  a  claim  on  the  part 
of  the  government  to  decide  exactly  what  type  of  trade  union  opin- 
ion it  would  allow  to  be  represented  in  America,  and  with  an  ele- 
mentary exercise  of  proper  spirit  that  steps  were  taken  to  contest 
the  claim  by  this,  the  industrial  commons  of  Great  Britain. 

For  this  jubilee  meeting,  which  reaffirmed  the  attitude  of  trade 
union  England  toward  the  continuance  of  the  war,  toward  an  unim- 
perialistic  peace  and  toward  the  "diplomacy  of  democracy" — which 
reasserted  the  cohesion  of  the  forces  of  labor  against  the  efforts 
to  separate  the  industrial  and  political  arms  of  the  movement, — 
and  which  sustained  the  leadership  of  that  "new  majority"  which 
we  saw  crystallize  in  the  conferences  twelve  months  before, — this 
meeting  in  itself  represented  the  largest  membership  of  wage  earn- 
ers ever  mustered  into  one  national  body.  Small  wonder  that  the 
impulses  toward  self-determination  aroused  by  the  war  should  assert 
themselves  here. 

In  1868,  when  the  first  congress  met  in  Manchester,  34  dele- 
gates were  present,  and  they  represented  118,367  members  of  trade 
unions.  The  Derby  Congress  was  attended  by  nearly  900  dele- 
gates representing  between  four  and  five  million  members.  "The 
numerical  progress  of  the  Congress  during  this  half  century,"  said 
the  London  Times,  "is  a  rough  measure  of  its  growth  in  power  as 
the  instrument  for  expressing  the  political  and  social  views  and 
aspirations  of  the  working  people."  "The  power  of  labor  has 
doubled  during  the  war,"  said  the  British  Premier  in  welcoming 
President  Gompers  to  England,  a  fortnight  earlier.     As  compared 


JUBILEE  YEAR  203 

even  with  the  Congress  at  Blackpool  the  year  before,  the  meeting 
showed  a  remarkable  advance  in  point  of  numbers,  for  the  return 
of  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Engineers,  which  had  held  aloof 
for  several  years,  the  adhesion  of  the  Workers'  Union  and  the  Iron- 
founders'  Society  and  the  increase  in  the  membership  of  other 
unions,  had  raised  the  strength  of  the  Congress  during  the  year  by- 
nearly  500,000  affiliated  members. 

On  the  whole,  it  was  a  great  and  encouraging  congress,  great 
in  its  unprecedented  numbers  and  encouraging  in  that  it  kept  its 
faith  and  its  equilibrium  and  refused  to  be  led  away  from  the 
great  objects  which  trade  unionism  has  immediately  to  gain.  It 
was,  however,  also  a  congress  of  undercurrents  which  Havelock 
Wilson  busily  kept  in  motion.  The  lavish  expenditure  of  money, 
his  own  or  somebody's  else,  by  this  labor  official  aroused  comment 
v/hich  was  not  lessened  by  Thomas'  revelation  of  the  suddenness 
of  the  spender's  conversion  to  the  policy  of  the  economic  boycott. 
What,  to  put  it  bluntly,  was  Wilson  after?  There  were  many  re- 
plies to  this  question,  but  the  reply  having  most  support  was  sug- 
gested by  a  representative  of  the  ship  stewards,  who  told  Wilson 
that  there  was  "political  faking"  behind  his  crusade,  and  deplored 
the  circumstance  that  "the  dead  bodies  of  seamen  should  be  used 
in  playing  the  low-down  game  of  tariff  reform." 


CROSS   CURRENTS   IN   THE   ECONOMIC   FIELD 

The  nature  of  those  currents  will  be  clearer  if  we  retrace  some 
of  the  events  of  the  months  preceding  Derby  which  had  revealed  the 
tensile  strength  of  the  "new  majority,"  in  the  political  and  economic 
fields.  Political  developments  and  the  part  which  American  labor, 
wittingly  or  unwittingly,  came  to  play  in  them  will  be  taken  up  in 
later  chapters.  Here,  let  us  deal  with  friction  between  the  govern- 
ment and  the  workers  in  the  industrial  field; — strikes  on  a  scale 
which,  whatever  their  justification,  might  jeopardize  the  supreme 
business  the  nation  had  in  hand,  and,  more,  the  outcroppings  on 
the  extreme  left  of  mass  sentiment  for  direct  economic  action  to 
force  the  government  to  begin  negotiations  and  end  the  war. 

In  the  early  winter  of  191 7-18,  the  belief  that  there  was  a  mil- 
itary stalemate  on  the  western  front  and  a  feeling  of  impotence 
in  pressing  the  government  to  outflank  it  by  democratic  statesman- 
ship, were  current  in  all  walks  of  life  in  England.  They  found 
characteristic  expression  in  the  industrial  centers  in  demonstra- 
tions against  any  coercive  measures  associated  with  the  govern- 
ment's war  policies.    Moreover,  the  rise  of  Bolshevikism  to  power 


204  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

in  Russia,  was  not  without  its  reaction  in  working-class  circles  the 
world  over. 

The  background  of  social  unrest  to  the  Nottingham  meeting  in 
January,  1918,  has  been  brought  out.  Within  the  following  fortnight 
there  was  a  clash  in  the  munitions  trades  over  the  application  of 
the  man-power  bill  and  we  find  Henderson,  on  the  one  hand,  urg- 
ing the  government  to  meet  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Engineers 
in  conference,  in  line  with  what  its  members  understood  to  have 
been  a  pledge,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  charging  the  workers  not 
to  lay  down  tools  in  an  effort  to  coerce  the  government  to  begin 
peace  negotiations.    He  said  (February,  19 18): 

We  are  all  weary  of  war.  Immediate  peace  is  the  greatest  need 
of  the  world.  But  peace  cannot  be  achieved  by  one  section  of 
labor  acting  by  itself.  Peace  will  come  when  the  working-class 
movement  as  a  whole  has  discovered  by  conference  the  conditions 
of  an  honorable  and  democratic  peace  worthy  of  the  unimaginable 
sacrifices  the   people  have  made. 

The  temper  of  the  workmen  is  most  dangerous.  The  unyielding 
attitude  of  the  government  is  bringing  the  country  to  the  verge  of 
industrial  revolution,  and  unless  a  more  just  and  reasonable  atti- 
tude is  adopted  I  am  seriously  apprehensive  that  an  irreparable 
break  between  an  important  section  of  industrial  labor  and  the 
government   will   result.  .  .  . 

In  the  past,  labor  has  responded  with  real  patriotism,  fully  and 
freely.  Is  it  too  much  to  appeal  to  the  patriotism  of  the  govern- 
ment? I  strongly  urge  the  government  to  display  a  more  reason- 
able spirit. 

Hasty  measures  of  the  kind  contemplated  may  not  only  embarrass 
those  of  us  who  are  trying  to  promote  a  moral  and  political  offensive 
on  the  part  of  the  working  classes  and  destroy  their  unity.  They 
also  may  give  to  the  reactionary  forces  further  opportunities  to 
divide  and  weaken  our  efforts.  Democratic  diplomacy  has  begun. 
.  .  .  Peace  must  be  made  on  these  ter*^s  and  on  no  other.  That 
is  our  policy.  It  will  be  presented  as  a  moral  ultimatum  to  the 
governments  from  an  organized  democracy  in  all  the  belligerent 
governments.  I  appeal  in  all  earnestness  to  the  workers  not  to  wreck 
this  great  triumph  of  the  international  working-class  movement  in 
the  field  of  diplomacy  by  a  precipitate  action  which  can  only  end  in 
discrediting  and  defeating  the  democratic  cause. 

During  the  sobering  weeks  ushered  in  by  the  enemy  offensive 
in  March,  British  labor  closed  its  ranks  before  the  threat  of  a 
military  decision  against  the  Allies.  Meetings  of  district  and  na- 
tional unions  voted  down  resolutions  declaring  that  the  war  was 
being  prolonged  for  materialistic  and  capitalistic  objects,  and  that 
labor  should  cease  its  support  of  the  government.     The  National 


JUBILEE  YEAR  205 

Union  of  Dock  Labourers  (James  Sexton,  secretary)  sent  a  cir- 
cular appealing  to  the  workers  to  put  aside  any  grievances  they 
might  have  and  "to  put  in  all  they  know  how"  in  the  greatest  crisis 
the  nation  had  ever  faced.  Sexton  is  of  the  right;  but  turn  to  the 
miners,  under  the  lead  of  Smillie  of  the  left.  The  miners  had  just 
tallied  an  adverse  ballot  on  whether  they  approved  a  further  comb- 
out  in  the  coal  fields.  In  many  union  quarters,  the  comb-out  was 
mistrusted  as  a  move  calculated  to  weaken  the  strength  of  the 
unions,  eliminate  their  organizers  and  favor  the  dilutes.  When 
the  German  drive  began,  the  Prime  Minister  placed  the  army's 
necessities  before  representatives  of  the  federation.  The  executive 
thereupon  recommended  that  the  miners  use  the  federation's  own 
machinery  to  facilitate  the  comb-out.  Moreover,  a  new  flow  of 
volunteering  set  in  which,  in  time,  with  the  loss  of  French  pits, 
actually  became  a  source  of  national  embarrassment.  In  the  muni- 
tion trades,  the  Prime  Minister  had  on  February  28  and  March  8 
cut  the  tangle  as  to  negotiations  by  himself  receiving  a  deputation 
from  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Engineers,  and  a  compromise  had 
been  arrived  at;  but  on  March  21,  an  unofficial  conference  at 
Manchester  passed  drastic  resolutions  for  a  general  strike  on  April 
6,  unless  orders  for  the  comb-out  were  previously  withdrawn.  Here 
again,  the  effect  of  the  German  offensive  v^as  instant  and  complete, 
and  the  arrangements  committee  responsible  for  calling  the  Man- 
chester conference  rescinded  the  resolutions  there  passed. 


THE   IRISH    CRISIS 

Moreover,  when  in  the  midst  of  the  crisis,  the  government  came 
forward  with  its  dual  conscription-home-rule  policy  for  Ireland, 
British  labor  did  not  content  itself  with  mere  parliamentary  opposi- 
tion to  the  former  and  advocacy  of  the  latter. 

J.  H.  Thomas  went  to  Ireland.  His  address  at  a  meeting  on 
April  28  in  the  Mansion  House,  Dublin,  on  '^ Conscription:  Is  a 
Solution  Possible?"  as  reported  in  the  Times  is  a  good  reflection  of 
the  attitude  at  the  crisis  of  the  "new  majority."  It  at  once  was  a 
clear  statement  of  British  labor's  opposition  to  coercive  militarism 
by  whomsoever  practised;  and  a  ringing  verdict  as  to  where  the 
scales  tipped  between  the  British  cause  and  the  Prussian: 

Mr.  Thomas  said  he  voted  against  conscription.  (A  voice:  Why 
did  you  go  on  recruiting  platforms?)  He  could  not  consistently 
oppose  conscription  unless  he  did  something  for  voluntarism. 
(Hisses.)  He  asked  Irishmen  to  try  to  understand  his  point  of 
view.    He  had  opposed  conscription,  when  he  had  been  howled  down 


2o6  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

in  Parliament  and  ridiculed  and  condemned,  but  he  stuck  to  his 
ground  because  he  believed  that  conscription  was  wrong.  He  had 
taken  his  stand  on  recruiting  because  he  believed  that  Belgium  had 
been  violated.  (A  laugh.)  He  did  not  apologize  for  it.  He  believed 
that  when  Belgium  was  violated  there  was  a  moral  obligation  upon 
him  to  fight  the  Germans,  and  he  was  glad  to  say  that  many  Irish- 
men acted  on  the  same  idea.  Just  as  he  felt  then  that  he  would 
fight  against  brute  force  and  take  his  stand  against  any  Power  that 
assumed  that  might  was  right,  so  he  took  his  stand  to-day,  in  spite 
of  any  opposition,  sneers,  or  jeers,  and  he  said  that  he  would  rather 
that  he  himself  and  his  family  should  be  entirely  wiped  out  than 
that  he  should  see  the  Germans  ruling  in  his  country.  Those  who 
listened  to  him  might  take  the  opposite  view.  (Cries  of  "We  don't.") 
But  if  they  did  they  had  no  right  to  deny  him  his  point  of  view. 

British  labor  was  not  blind  to-  the  fact  that  conscription  was 
foreign  to  their  principles  and  to  liberty ;  that  it  entrenched  militar- 
ism, and  that  they  had  got  to  fight  as  strenuously  against  the  setting 
up  of  English  militarism  as  against  German  militarism.  Feeling  as 
he  did  that  on  principle,  apart  from  any  question  of  expediency,  con- 
scription was  wrong,  he  entirely  agreed  that  nothing  was  so  mean 
and  so  contemptible  as  the  suggestion  that  Home  Rule  was  to  be 
given  to  them  as  a  bargain  for  accepting  something  that  they  abso- 
lutely detested.  (Cries  of  "We  don't  want  it.")  As  one  who  be- 
lieved in  self-determination,  he  resented  as  bitterly  as  Irishmen  did 
that  such  a  bargain  should  be  proposed.  Nothing  in  his  judgment 
showed  such  a  want  of  statesmanship  as  the  action  of  the  Govern- 
ment in  that  connection.  He  believed  in  Home  Rule  because  he 
believed  that  it  was  impossible  to  govern  a  country  against  the 
wishes  and  will  of  the  people.  Welshmen  and  Scotchmen,  as  well 
as  Irishmen,  said  precisely  the  same  thing — that  no  British  Govern- 
ment could  govern  them  as  well  as  they  themselves  could. 

Looking  at  the  position  honestly  and  dispassionately,  he  said  that 
the  war  had  brought  problems  that  compelled  consideration  of  the 
question  of  Irish  self-government  in  a  different  light.  He  believed 
that  a  profound  blunder  had  been  made,  and  the  Government  must 
retrieve  that  blunder.  Therefore  he  asked  Irishmen  not  to  be  swayed 
by  passion  or  carried  away  by  resentment,  but  to  realize  that,  serious 
as  their  position  had  been  in  the  past,  it  was  nothing  comparable 
with  the  gravity  and  seriousness  of  the  position  now. 

A  tragedy  was  likely  to  arise  if  common  sense,  prudent  states- 
manship, and  above  all  confidence  in  each  other,  were  not  exercised 
to  avert  it.  (Cheers.)  He  begged  them  to  believe  that  the  British 
democracy  was  anxious  to  do  justice  to  Ireland,  and  he  asked  them 
to  remember  that  nothing  would  be  more  fatal  to  the  interests  of 
Irish  workers,  or  the  interests  of  British  workers,  than  a  rupture 
between  those  of  both  countries.  There  was  not  a  home  in  Great 
Britain  where  the  father  and  mother  were  not  throbbing  with 
anxiety  for  some  one  far  away.  Referring  to  an  interruption,  he 
said  it  was  lost  on  one  whose  boy  was  fighting  at  the   front.     A 


JUBILEE  YEAR  207 

victory  for  Germany  would  be  the  end  both  of  liberty  and  of 
democracy;  and  they  had  no  right  to  challenge  the  honor  of  those 
who  were  prepared  to  lay  down  their  lives  for  the  cause  of  the 
Allies. 

THE   LABOR   EMBARGOES 

By  midsummer,  with  the  German  drive  blunted  and  turned  back, 
restlessness  at  industrial  conditions  at  home  again  asserted  itself, 
and  there  came  a  series  of  strikes  of  London  police,  the  tube  and 
bus-women,  the  munitions  workers,  and  the  railroaders.  Old  impa- 
tience at  the  government's  foreign  policy  reawakened;  old  suspi- 
cions that  profiteering  and  anti-union  interests  were,  under  cover 
of  the  war,  driving  an  entering  wedge  for  sweated  labor  and  indus- 
trial conscription. 

Allegations  of  attempts  to  break  down  trade  union  standards 
came  out  in  the  traction  strike  when  a  committee  representing  the 
employees  gave  out  a  statement  on  July  28  saying: 

Women  are  receiving  less  wages  than  men,  in  our  case  by  12s, 
6d.,  and  we  wish  the  country  to  know  that  we  have  secured  definite 
evidence  that  the  railways  in  general  have  been  refusing  to  employ 
discharged  soldiers  and  are  employing  women  instead  at  a  lower 
rate  of  wages. 

This  is  a  serious  matter  to  soldiers  who  have  been  promised 
their  jobs  on  their  return,  and  it  is  even  more  serious  for  those 
men  who  will  be  demobilized  at  the  end  of  the  war.  If  they  are 
to  be  faced  by  the  competition  of  cheaper  women  labor,  the  period 
of  reconstruction  will  be  marked  by  great  unrest  throughout  the 
labor  world,  which  will  be  a  danger  to  the  welfare  of  the  whole 
country. 

Women,  practically  all  of  whom  have  husbands  or  sons  at  the 
front,  are  determined  that  they  are  not  going  to  cheapen  labor  at 
the  expense  of  the  soldiers. 

The  issue  of  industrial  conscription  came  up  in  the  midlands. 
The  spring  comb-out  and  volunteeiing  had  cut  down  the  supply 
of  skilled  labor  at  the  same  time  that  an  augmented  demand  for 
various  kinds  of  munitions  made  the  need  for  such  labor  acute. 
Certain  firms  were  charged  with  engrossing  more  than  their  fair 
share  by  "labor  poaching,"  and  the  Ministry  of  Munitions  issued  an 
embargo  on  three  of  them  in  Coventry.  It  added  to  a  list  of 
bureaucratic  blunders  in  the  past  by  failing  to  explain  its  course 
to  the  workers.  One  of  the  firms  (the  Hotchkiss  Company)  dis- 
tributed a  provocative  notice  to  foremen  which  fell  into  the  hands  of 
the  shop  stewards.  This  notice  stated  that  they  were  prohibited 
from  engaging  "skilled  men"  of  any  type  and  defined  the  term 


2o8  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

as  meaning  any  men  in  receipt  of  the  standard  district  rate.  It 
went  on  to  say  that  every  effort  must  be  made  "whenever  it  is 
necessary  to  employ  men,  to  make  use  only  of  semi-skilled  or 
unskilled  men."  "The  circulation  among  skilled  men  of  such  a 
statement  without  any  explanation,"  said  the  Times,  editorially, 
"was  like  throwing  lighted  matches  about  a  filling  factory.  It 
would  look  to  them  like  the  beginning  of  a  campaign  to  oust  them 
out  of  employment,  drive  them  into  the  army  and  lower  wages. 
We  can  hardly  wonder  that  they  took  alarm."  They  did  just  that — 
struck  against  the  advice  of  the  local  union  committee  and  the 
strike  spread  to  Birmingham. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  as  a  body  the  skilled  men  in  the 
munition  trades  had  not  in  any  sense  been  slackers.  Earlier  in 
the  war  the  pressure  of  both  government  and  public  opinion  was 
brought  to  bear  upon  them  to  keep  them  at  their  crucial  posts  in 
the  rapidly  expanding  war  industries,  and  to  bring  back  those  who 
had  enlisted.  The  way  the  situation  provoked  by  the  embargo 
was  approached  from  four  different  angles  was  illuminating  and 
characteristic: 

(a)  To  quote  a  news  report: 

The  Minister  of  Munitions  (Winston  Churchill)  made  a  belated 
movement  to  bring  the  facts  before  the  workmen  by  distributing 
handbills  and  announced  by  public  proclamation  that  any  person 
who  was  guilty  of  inciting  others  to  leave  work,  or  took  any  part 
in  organizing  a  strike,  rendered  himself  liable  to  very  serious  pen- 
alties under  the  Defence  of  the  Realm  Act.  The  Ministry  also 
gave  a  significant  reminder  to  the  young  men  in  munition  factories 
that  only  the  fact  that  they  were  absolutely  needed  at  their  work, 
and  were  loyally  willing  to  do  their  work,  had  justified  their  exemp- 
tion from  military  service. 

(b)  The  Minister  of  Labour  (George  Roberts),  addressing  the 
London  Master  Printers'  Association,  admonished  those  "misled 
people"  that  were  striking. 

against  the  state,  against  the  government,  who  were  sharing  all  the 
responsibility — a  heavy  responsibility  under  the  most  favorable  cir- 
cumstances— of  prosecuting  the  war  to  the  only  issue  they  could 
contemplate,  the  absolute  success  of  the  Allied  cause  .  .  .  Public  opin- 
ion would  agree  that  those  men  ought  not  to  be  exempted  from  the 
operations  of  those  [Military  Service]  acts. 

(c)  J.  Havelock  Wilson,  of  the  Sailors'  and  Firemen's  Union, 
issued  a  message: 


JUBILEE  YEAR  209 

The  seamen  and  firemen  who  daily  risk  and  sacrifice  their  lives 
to  carry  food  to  the  working  men  and  their  families  appeal  to  the 
trades  unionists  involved  in  munitions  dispute  not  to  betray  their 
country.  Never  mind  government  departments,  employers,  embar- 
goes, or  other  inconveniences.  When  we  have  won  the  war  we 
will  support  you  through  thick  and  thin  in  maintaining  the  prin- 
ciples of  trades  unionism,  for  which  some  of  us  have  worked  and 
suffered  all  our  lives.  Don't  be  misled  by  the  Bolshies,  who  are 
the  greatest  enemies  of  trades  unionism.  Fifteen  thousand  non- 
combatant  seafaring  men  have  been  foully  murdered  by  the  Huns. 
Are  you  going  to  fight  the  Government  over  an  embargo  instead  of 
doing  your  bit  to  destroy  Prussian  militarism  and  all  it  stands  for? 

(d)  J,  H.  Thomas,  M.  P.,  speaking  at  a  large  meeting  of  rail- 
waymen  at  Weston-super-Mare,  said: 

The  attention  of  the  country  focused  on  the  prospect  of  a  serious 
dispute  in  the  engineering  industry.  To  those  who  were  abusing  the 
engineers  he  would  say,  "Stop  this  fooling,"  and  to  the  engineers 
themselves  his  words  were,  "Don't  forget  the  nation's  difficulty. 
Don't  forget  what  is  due  to  our  soldiers  at  the  front,  and,  above  all, 
remember  that  loyalty  to  your  own  executive  is  a  fundamental  of 
trade  unionism."  It  ought  not  to  be  impossible  for  the  present  trou- 
ble to  be  adjusted. 

As  it  was:  the  government  appointed  a  Committee  on  Labour 
Embargoes  consisting  of  representatives  of  employers  and  em- 
ployees, under  the  presidency  of  Justice  McCardie,  which  recom- 
mended that  changes  in  government  policy  with  respect  to  muni- 
tion work  should  be  "immediately  and  effectively"  communicated  to 
employers  and  workmen  concerned,  both  centrally  and  locally,  to 
secure  their  confidence  and  cooperation,  and  that  a  joint  committee 
consisting  of  the  representatives  of  both  should  be  established  forth- 
with, under  a  chairman  appointed  by  the  government,  to  advise  the 
Admiralty  and  Ministry  of  Munitions  on  such  matters. 

THE  RAILROAD  FLARE-UP 

Here  we  had  responsible  leaders  of  the  new  majority,  like 
Thomas,  throwing  their  weight  against  either  bureaucrats  or  em- 
ployers who  ran  roughshod  over  constitutional  labor  procedure  at 
a  time  when  a  stoppage  of  work  was  of  national  concern.  Shortly 
thereafter,  we  find  these  leaders  joining  issue  with  forces  which 
flouted  it  from  the  opposite  quarter. 

The  National  Union  of  Railwaymen  is  the  largest  single  trade 
union  in  Great  Britain,  with  a  membership  of  400,000,  and  branches 
throughout  the  country  to  the  number  of  1300;  Thomas,  as  gen- 


210  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

eral  secretary,  received  the  largest  vote  given  any  officer.  At  the 
annual  conference  at  Edinburgh,  in  June,  he  pointed  out  that 
"without  once  having  to  threaten  or  attempt  a  stoppage  of  work, 
the  union  had  succeeded  in  improving  the  condition  of  its  mem- 
bers, at  the  same  time  keeping  clearly  in  mind  their  responsibility 
to  the  nation  engaged  in  a  life  and  death  struggle."  An  insurgent 
strike  among  the  railwaymen  broke  out  in  September  (1918),  a 
fortnight  following  the  Derby  Conference,  and  Thomas  went  to 
the  mat. 

The  South  Wales  miners  had  by  a  threat  of  strike  secured  an 
increase  of  nine  shillings  a  week.  The  railway  men  wanted  ten, 
and  as  result  of  negotiations  between  the  government  and  a  dele- 
gate conference  were  awarded  five — equivalent  to  a  cumulative 
increase  of  120  per  cent  over  their  pre-war  wage.  Moreover,  ma- 
chinery was  provided  for  automatic  revisions  to  meet  further  in- 
creases. This  provision  does  not  seem  to  have  been  generally  under- 
stood. The  South  Wales  railwaymen  returned  from  the  negotia- 
tions dissatisfied,  holding  that  the  settlement  should  not  have  been 
accepted  without  a  mandate  from  the  full  membership  of  the  union. 
The  enginemen,^  the  highest  paid,  believed  that  their  increase  was 
not  proportionate.  Ten  men  on  a  branch  line  quit;  a  self-consti- 
tuted strike  committee  set  up  at  Newport,  and  within  two  days 
the  strike  had  spread  to  London.  While  it  involved  a  compara- 
tively small  number  of  men,  they  were  so  placed  that  traffic  was 
tied  up  on  the  Great  Western;  100,000  miners  were  thrown  out  of 
work;  food,  hospital  and  troop  train  service  was  interrupted.  Charges 
were  subsequently  made  in  the  London  papers  that  the  strike  was 
instigated  by  stop-the-war  propagandists.  It  was  at  least  a  sec- 
tional effort  in  which  the  rank  and  file  sought  to  take  things  into 
their  own  hands,  demanding  either  the  concession  of  their  full 
demand  or  the  reopening  of  negotiations  in  which  the  government 
should  treat  not  v/ith  the  recognized  officers,  but  with  delegates 
to  be  appointed  by  the  strikers. 

The  Board  of  Trade  put  its  case  in  a  statement  issued  at  mid- 
night on  September  23: 

...  It  is  obvious  that  unless  there  is  some  authority  which  can 
negotiate  and  accept  a  settlement  on  behalf  of  the  men,  and  which 
is  loyally  accepted  by  all  the  men  concerned,  it  is  impossible  to 
carry  on  any  negotiations  with  a  view  to  arriving  at  a  settlement. 

The  action  of  these  men  is  not  only  a  strike  against  their  union, 
but  is  a  direct  challenge  against  all  ordered  government.  A  strike 
of  any  section  of  railway  employees  at  this  critical  period,  when 

^  In  part,  organized  separately  in  the  Locomotive  Engineers  and  Fire- 
men. 


THE  JUBILEE  YEAR  2ii 

the  news  from  all  fronts  is  so  very  encouraging,  can  only  be  at- 
tended with  the  gravest  consequences  to  this  country  and  to  our 
Allies.  .  .  . 

It  is  gratifying  that  only  a  small  section  of  the  railwaymen  have 
not  accepted  the  settlement  made  by  their  leaders,  and  the  thanks 
of  the  government  and  the  nation  are  due  to  the  railwaymen  who 
are  loyally  abiding  by  the  agreement  to  perform  their  duties  in  a 
spirit  of  devotion  to  their  country's  interests  which  has  been  char- 
acteristic of  railwaymen  during  the  course  of  the  war. 

The  government  announced  that  it  proposed  to  use  the  military 
and  naval  forces  to  secure  the  maintenance  of  essential  service. 
The  Great  Western  issued  notice  to  the  effect  that  unless  men  of 
military  age  immediately  presented  themselves  for  work,  their  ex- 
emption certificates  would  be  cancelled.  An  interim  injunction  was 
secured  to  prevent  the  unions  from  paying  strike  pay;  3000  men 
of  the  London  Rifle  Brigade  were  dispatched  in  trains  manned  by 
Royal  Engineers  and  were  bivouacked  in  the  streets  of  Newport. 
But  the  only  clash  came  when  a  number  of  wounded  soldiers  vis- 
ited the  local  I.  L.  P.  headquarters,  and  mistaking  a  knot  of  rail- 
waymen for  the  strike  committee,  cried  "over  the  top"  and  made 
a  rush  for  them,  belaboring  them  with  their  sticks  and  crutches. 

The  strike  v/as  fought  and  terminated  not  by  these  manifesta- 
tions of  authority,  but  by  the  spear-head  of  leadership  of  a  single 
man,  who  posted  to  Newport,  spoke  to  the  crowds,  forced  his  way 
into  the  strike  committee,  obliged  them  to  let  him  lay  the  whole 
case  before  the  men  and  nailed  various  untruths  that  had  circu- 
lated. That  man  was  Thomas.  He  stood  up  to  an  hour's  cross- 
questioning  and  his  replies  were  cheered  again  and  again.  He  gave 
out  a  statement  to  the  press  in  which  he  said: 

I  desire  to  warn  any  of  our  members  who  may  feel  inclined  to 
act  in  sympathy  with  the  strikers  that  this  is  a  strike  against  the 
government  as  well  as  against  the  railway  companies  and  their  own 
union.  It  occurs  at  a  time  when  the  fortunes  of  the  war  seem 
brightest,  and  when  the  dawn  of  peace  appears  near.  Words  can- 
not express  my  disappointment  and  grief  that  the  railwaymen  are, 
by  this  unfortunate  action,  prejudicing  a  record  of  war  service  as 
proud  as  any  that  can  be  claimed  by  other  workmen.  ...  I  am  sorry, 
but  I  can  understand  the  bitterness  that  has  been  displayed  by  the 
wounded  soldiers  and  the  public.  My  task  is  a  difficult  one,  but .  I 
shall  continue  to  struggle  here  to  prevent  the  spread  of  a  policy 
which  will  be  as  disastrous  to  the  men  as  it  is  fatal  to  the  interests 
of  the  country. 

It  was  a  fellow  trade  unionist  in  the  government  who,  with  the 
stoppage  of  traffic  on  the  Great  Western,  got  food  through  on  motor 


212  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

lorries,  and  churns  of  milk  to  the  London  hospitals;  a  fellow  mem- 
ber of  the  new  majority  who  in  a  "message  to  the  strikers"  backed 
up  Thomas  in  his  difficult  and  successful  task.  The  message  from 
Clynes  read: 

What  workmen  would  have  looked  on  as  a  crime  in  the  first  year 
or  two  of  the  war,  is  not  less  an  offence  against  their  reputation 
and  the  national  interest,  now  that  democratic  principles  are  being 
so  gallantly  defended  by  millions  of  our  men  in  the  field.  ...  A 
few  years  ago  railway  men  fought  valiantly  and  successfully  to 
get  recognition  for  their  leaders  and  executives.  They  therefore 
ought  now  to  recognize  and  respect  the  bargain  made  by  their 
leaders  for  them.  Let  them  think  not  only  of  the  credit  of  their 
unions,  but  of  the  appalling  prospect  of  what  our  food  situation 
would  be  if  supplies  are  seriously  checked  by  railway  dislocation 
while  the  war  continues. 

Thomas,  the  succeeding  day,  carried  his  cause  to  a  meeting  at 
Cardiff  of  the  South  Wales  council  of  the  union,  a  body  representa- 
tive of  all  the  branches  in  the  district.  The  correspondent  of  the 
Manchester  Guardian  wrote  of  the  "undaunted  stand"  and  "coura- 
geous speech"  of  this  two  fisted  fighting  man,  with  his  hard  sayings, 
"wrestling  strenuously  with  the  judgments  of  both  strikers  and  non- 
strikers." 
The  London  Times'  report  of  his  speech  at  Cardiff  follows: 

Mr.  Thomas,  who  was  greeted  with  cries  of  "Good  old  Jim," 
said  the  decision  to  strike  was  conveyed  by  him  to  the  government 
and  he  received  the  verdict  of  the  War  Cabinet  in  these  words: 
"We  accept  the  challenge  of  these  men,  not  only  as  a  challenge  to 
your  union  and  to  your  ow^n  authority,  but  as  a  challenge  to  the 
government,  and  not  a  comma  of  the  agreement  will  be  altered, 
even  if  the  whole  of  the  railwaymen  of  the  country  stop.  What  is 
more,  let  it  be  distinctly  understood  that  we  are  going  to  discharge 
our  functions  as  a  government  regardless  of  consequences."  Mr. 
Thomas  continued:  "That  is  the  issue  you  have  to  face.  That  is 
the  issue  I  am  going  to  face,  and  I  tell  you  with  all  deliberation  and 
sincerity  that  if  I  were  Prime  Minister,  if  I  were  a  member  of 
the  War  Cabinet  (which  I  might  have  been),  I  would  do  precisely 
the  same."  (Cheers.)  ".  .  .  Are  you  going  to  strike  at  the  backs  of 
your  own  lads,  and  give  encouragement  to  Germany?  .  .  .  You  have 
forced  5,000,000  of  your  comrades,  100,000  of  your  fellow-workmen  to 
hate  your  very  name.  This  act  has  been  done,  let  it  be  observed, 
by  people  who  take  no  responsibility  of  leadership.  I  only  desired 
to  hold  my  position  in  your  union  so  long  as  I  had  the  confidence 
of  the  men" — ("You  have  it") — "but  this  action  shows  I  have  not. 
I  am  going  to  see  this  out;  then  I  cease  to  be  your  general  secre- 
tary."     ("No,  no.")      "I   cannot  go  on  hammering  as  I  have   for 


THE  JUBILEE  YEAR  213 

years,  with  no  rest,  exhausting  myself  physically  and  mentally, 
fighting  your  battles  regardless  of  personal  considerations,  only  to 
be  flouted  at  a  critical  hour." 

The  meeting,  with  only  a  dozen  dissentients,  voted  to  return  to 
work  at  once;  voted  their  confidence  in  Thomas.  But  he  was  not 
through.  The  strike  ended,  he  submitted  his  resignation  to  the 
executive  committee  of  the  National  Union  of  Railwaymen,  on  the 
ground  that  no  other  course  was  open  to 

one  who  believes  in  constitutional  government  in  trade  unionism; 
who  believes  that  the  same  standard  of  honor  demanded  from  the 
other  side  is  the  least  we  are  prepared  to  give  ourselves. 

Moreover,  whoever  is  responsible  for  the  recent  strike,  a  strike 
as  wicked  as  it  was  dangerous,  are  people  whose  policy  and  methods 
must  not  only  be  challenged,  but  must  te  fought.  Otherwise,  we 
shall  very  soon  reach  a  stage  in  this  country  similar  to  that  through 
which  Russia  is  now  passing.  Therefore,  in  taking  this  course,  I 
do  it  as  a  challenge  to  such  methods,  and  am  prepared  to  bear  all 
the  consequences  of  my  action. 

The  executive  committee  of  the  N.  U.  R.  promptly  declined  to 
accept  his  resignation,  but  it  was  only  expressions  of  confidence 
from  90  per  cent  of  the  membership  which  reconciled  him  to  retain- 
ing office.^  His  good  faith  as  a  labor  leader,  his  constitutional 
principles  as  a  trade  unionist,  his  stand  on  the  war  and  his  belief 
with  Henderson  in  a  united  "moral  and  political  offensive"  as  the 
channel  for  working-class  action  to  secure  a  democratic  settle- 
ment— all  were  at  stake,  and  he  rang  true  to  that  conception  of 
British  trade  unionism  which  had  found  expression  in  its  jubilee 
congress  at  Derby. 

^  Following  the  armistice,  the  evacuation  of  France  and  Belgium  and 
the  surrender  of  the  German  fleet,  the  railwaymen  ended  the  strike  truce 
they  had  faithfully  kept  as  a  national  body  throughout  the  war,  and_  in 
December,  1918,  under  Thomas'  leadership,  demanded  and  won  recognition 
of  the  principle  of  the  8  hour  day. 


CHAPTER    XVIII 

THE    RIGHT    STRIKES    BACK 

When  James  Wilson,  chairman  of  the  mission  of  the  Amer- 
ican Federation  of  Labor,  which  visited  England  in  the  spring  of 
19 18  at  the  expense  of  the  British  government,  reached  "an  Atlan- 
tic port"  on  his  return,  he  said  in  an  interview  with  a  reporter  of 
the  New  York   Tribune: — 

When  I  speak  of  labor,  I  mean  the  actual  workers  of  Britain. 
There  is,  of  course,  a  Labour  Party,  which  is  a  purely  political 
organization  headed  by  Ramsay  MacDonald,  Arthur  Henderson 
and  Philip  Snowden, 

He  was  quoted  in  the  New  York  Sun: — 

There  are  a  certain  class  of  people  who  term  themselves  leaders 
of  labor  who  are  in  reality  not  workingmen,  but  members  of  a  labor 
political  party.  The  mission  had  opportunities  to  speak  to  thousands 
of  workingmen,  and  in  all  cases  the  policy  of  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor  was  received  with  cheers  and  practically  unanimous 
approval.  The  purpose  of  the  mission  was  to  oppose  the  pacifist 
movement  among  labor  abroad  and  to  report  the  situation  back  to 
Samuel  Gompers.  The  British  workingmen  are  to  have  a  new  labor 
party,  which  will  rid  the  ranks  of  the  workers  of  the  politicians 
who  now  are  endeavoring  to  exploit  labor. 

Wilson  then  proceeded  to  name  Henderson  as  one  of  these  poli- 
ticians. 

These  comments,  seeking  to  drive  a  wedge  into  British  labor 
and  split  it  away  from  its  majority  leadership,  were  not  only  badly 
mixed  and  untrue;  they  were  dangerous.  Shouted  across  three 
thousand  miles  of  water,  like  repartees  over  the  back-fence,  they 
were  an  aggravated  continuation  of  the  lectures  against  socialism 
and  internationalism  to  which  members  of  the  American  delega- 
tion treated  British  industrial  centers  like  the  Clyde.  They  gave 
a  misleading  account  of  British  labor  opinion,  which  had  expressed 
itself  through  its  two  great  bodies  in  unison.  They  were  an  attack 
on  the  Labour  Party,  as  the  weak  and  erring  parasite  of  the  indus- 
trial movement. 

214 


THE  RIGHT  STRIKES  BACK  215 

Whereas,  the  Labour  Party  is  the  political  expression  of  British 
trade  unionism.  They  were  an  attack  on  Arthur  Henderson  as  the 
personification  of  that  parasitism.  Whereas,  Arthur  Henderson  rep- 
resented the  Iron-founders'  Society  in  the  party  conferences,  and 
had  a  war  record  covering  four  years. 

There  was,  for  example,  a  moment  when  the  shop  stewards' 
movement  was  riding  the  Clyde — that  congeries  of  shipbuilding  and 
engineering  trades — like  wildfire.  Henderson  helped  Lloyd  George 
in  backfiring.  In  doing  it,  he  incurred  the  enmity  of  David  Kirk- 
wood,  who,  as  set  down  in  Chapter  XIV,  was  "convener"  of  shop 
stewards.  But  he  did  it  without  throwing  the  entire  shop  stewards' 
movement  to  the  revolutionary  left.  This  is  only  one  of  the  many 
services  Henderson  had  rendered  the  nation.  He  could  not  have 
held  labor  together  if  he  had  swallowed  government  policy  whole, 
with  its  weather-cock  expediency  in  swinging  from  knock-out  blows 
to  the  abandonment  of  Russia,  from  Irish  Home  Rule  to  Irish 
conscription. 

The  visit  of  the  American  labor  delegation  was  an  incident  in 
the  cross  currents  in  British  politics  throughout  1918.  To  these 
we  can  turn,  now  that  we  have  followed  the  course  of  the  respon- 
sible labor  leadership  in  the  economic  field.  Just  as  that  leader- 
ship had  to  reckon  there  with  bureaucratic  impingement  from  one 
side  and  sporadic  upheaval  from  the  other,  so  in  the  political  field 
the  new  majority  had  to  reckon  with  those  elements  which  demarked 
themselves  when  Henderson  broke  with  his  fellow  members  of  the 
war  cabinet  on  Russian  policy  and  on  the  issue  of  an  inter-bellig- 
erent labor  conference. 

We  have  seen  how,  at  that  parting  of  the  ways,  in  August,  191 7, 
the  government  labor  group  represented  by  Barnes,  Roberts,  and 
Hodge  gathered  the  skirts  of  denunciation  about  them  and  took 
up  positions  in  opposition  at  the  extreme  right,  while  Philip  Snow- 
den,  chairman  of  the  Independent  Labour  Party,  served  warning 
from  the  extreme  left  that  his  impatient  following  would  go  its 
own  gait;  how,  at  Nottingham  in  January  (1918),  party  regularity 
and  the  appeal  of  the  new  "diplomacy  of  democracy"  brought  an 
overwhelming  vote  behind  the  two-edged  war  aims  program;  how 
at  London  in  February  the  prospect  of  a  labor  government  and  the 
vision  of  a  reconstructed  England  carried  the  new  constitution  with 
its  compromise  between  constituent  trade  union  bodies  and  an  open 
membership;  how  at  London  in  June  (19 18)  another  compromise 
left  it  open  for  labor  members  to  remain  in  the  Ministry  while  giving 
the  Labour  Party  freedom  to  contest  bye-elections  against  coali- 
tion candidates.  As  result,  at  the  end  of  twelve  months — August 
to  August — the  new  majority,  while  holding  the  ground  occupiecJ 


2i6  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

by  the  labor  movement  as  a  whole  since  19 14  in  support  of  the 
war  as  a  defensive  one  against  Prussian  militarism,  had  more  and 
more  dissociated  itself  from  the  Lloyd  George  coalition  government 
in  both  foreign  policy  and  domestic  politics. 

The  swing  to  the  left  had  swept  in  the  great  trade  union  forma- 
tion and  the  cooperative  societies  as  well  as  the  political  movement, 
and  the  swing  was  unmistakably  toward  a  peace  unexploited  by 
imperialism,  toward  a  collectivism  tempered  by  liberty. 

For  very  opposite  reasons,  phases  of  this  development  had  been 
irritating  to  both  extremes. 

THE  I.  L.  p.  AS  A  FREE  LANCE 

The  swing  was  slow  and  step  by  step,  while  uncounted  men 
went  down  in  battle;  also  it  created  a  new  orthodoxy.  The  Inde- 
pendent Labour  Party  tugged  at  the  leashes. 

At  its  26th  annual  conference  at  Leicester,  at  the  end  of  March, 
191 8,  the  I.  L.  P.  recorded  the  establishment  of  153  new  branches 
and  a  total  gain  of  50  per  cent  in  membership  (much  of  it  the 
result  of  the  last  six  months'  work).  It  passed  a  so-called  soldiers' 
charter,  expressing  its  lively  concern  for  the  "decent  treatment  of 
the  men  who  receive  not  much  more  than  lip  service  from  the  pro- 
fessing patriots."  This  charter  called  for  substantial  increases  in 
pay,  separation  allowances  and  pensions  which  "should  be  based 
on  rates  of  civil  wages  and  should  respond  to  the  great  rise  in  the 
cost  of  living;" — for  standard  wages  for  discharged  men  regardless 
of  their  pensions; — for  generous  provision  for  the  industrial  train- 
ing of  the  children  of  deceased  soldiers; — for  the  fullest  "possible 
measure  of  civil  and  political  hberty"  for  soldiers  and  sailors; — 
for  the  abolition  of  the  death  penalty  in  the  army,  for  means  for 
legal  defense  at  military  trials  and  for  representation  of  privates 
in  courts  martial; — for  the  adequate  representation  of  self-govern- 
ing associations  of  private  soldiers  on  all  committees  dealing  with 
the  administration  of  war  pensions  and  similar  matters,  etc. 

In  moving  the  charter,  Ramsay  MacDonald  said: — 

It  must  be  taken  as  an  indication  of  intention.  It  means  funda- 
mentally to  say  that  the  soldier  is  a  man.  When  he  is  called  up 
by  the  state  he  retains  his  human  rights  and  his  civic  rights. 

The  conference  passed  radical  resolutions  on  peace  and  civil 
liberties.  The  peace  resolution  was  moved  by  Robert  Smillie.  The 
following  report  of  his  speech  is  taken  from  the  I.  L.  P.  press: — 

Mr.  Smillie  was  given  a  long  and  hearty  welcome.  He  said  sev- 
eral of  his  old  comrades  in  the  movement  had  told  him   he  was 


THE  RIGHT  STRIKES  BACK  217 

looking  amazingly  well.  He  was  not  nearly  so  well  looking  when 
they  met  him  at  the  Labour  Party  conference  or  at  the  Trades  Union 
Congress.  "How  can  any  one  look  well  at  the  Labour  Party  con- 
ference or  the  Trades  Union  Congress?"  he  asked,  and  the  delegates 
laughed  and  applauded. 

"Attending  the  L  L.  P.  conference  is  like  getting  a  breath  of 
the  sea,"  he  continued,  "swallowing  the  ozone.  It  gets  into  your 
lungs,  into  your  blood,  into  your  mind.  I  think  if  I  could  attend 
every  year  I  would  live  for  ever." 

The  soul  of  the  conference,  he  thought,  was  in  two  or  three  of 
the  resolutions,  the  resolution  moved  by  Comrade  MacDonald  and 
the  two  on  Peace  and  Liberty  that  were  before  them.  Peace  with- 
out liberty  was  not  good  enough.  They  must  endeavor  to  secure 
peace,  but  while  securing  it  they  ought  to  protect  the  little  liberty 
they  had. 

"Simmons  has  been  sentenced  to  prison,  and  one  of  the  clauses 
under  which  he  was  charged  was :  'Any  person  who  attempts  to 
cause  disaffection  among  the  civilian  population,'  and  so  on.  Why, 
good  heavens,  what  is  this  conference  trying  to  do  this  morning? 
(Loud  applause.)  What  are  you  here  for?  I  have  been  causing 
disaffection  for  nearly  40  years,  and  I  have  never  found  anything 
— or  hardly  anything — in  life  to  be  satisfied  with.  This  is  Easter 
time.  Some  twenty  centuries  ago  there  was  a  cross  erected,  and 
evidently  the  Defence  of  the  Realm  Act  was  enforced  in  that  coun- 
try. Evidently  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  going  about  causing  disaffec- 
tion among  the  civilian  population. 

"The  Churches  keep  his  Crucifixion  as  a  holiday,  but  they  have 
forgotten   his  teaching." 

Referring  to  the  Prime  Minister's  flippant  talk  of  the  last  man, 
Mr.  Smillie  drew  a  picture  of  the  last  Tommy  and  the  last  Fritz : — 

They  are  unshaven  and  ragged.  They  still  carry  their  bit  of 
wood  and  steel  with  them.  But  they  have  no  inclination  to  fight. 
They  have  an  inclination  to  talk.  The  shades  of  the  Kaiser  and 
our  Prime  Minister  hiss  at  them  to  go  on  and  get  it  finished.  Fritz 
says:  "Hullo,  Tommy,  are  we  to  finish  it?"  "Yes,"  says  Tommy. 
"But  what  is  it  all  about?"  "I  don't  know,  but  we  have  got  to 
finish  it."  Fritz  says:  "But  can't  we  finish  it  by  negotiation  and 
argument?"  Tommy  replies:  "H  we  had  a  penny  we  could  toss  up 
for  it."  They  have  a  cigarette  together  before  they  finish  it.  They 
are  both  mortally  wounded.  The  guns  are  thrown  away,  and  they 
clasp  hands  in  their  death  agony.  Fritz  says :  "I  am  going,  Tommy, 
but  what  was  it  all  about?"     "I  don't  know,"  Tommy  answers. 

"That  sounds  frivolous,"  said  Mr.  Smillie,  "I  have  no  idea  of 
being  frivolous.  We  are  all  feeling  too  deeply  for  that.  It  is  not 
more  frivolous  than  the  damnable  talk  about  the  last  man." 

Recall  the  situation  at  the  turn  of  the  spring,  following  the 
military  deadlock  of  the  winter  months.  The  German  high  com- 
mand had  brought  its  eastern  armies  to  the  West,  and  had  set 


2i8  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT  / 

out,  before  American  forces  could  be  brought  overseas  en  masse, 
to  smash  through  to  Paris  or  the  Channel  and  end  the  war  with 
a  military  decision  in  its  favor. 

This  was  the  same  sort  of  solution  that  had  been  held  up, 
spring  after  spring,  by  one  side  or  the  other.  The  members  of 
the  I.  L.  P.,  no  less  than  their  fellows,  were  against  giving  in  to 
a  German  military  decision.  That  should  be  kept  clear.  They 
stood  in  silence  to  do  honor  to  the  men  who  had  gone  down  in  the 
battle,  then  on.  But  with  the  unified  Allied  command  still  to 
demonstrate  itself  and  with  military  experts  skeptical  that  the 
trans-shipment  of  American  troops  would  do  more  than  restore  the 
equilibrium  destroyed  by  the  cave-in  of  the  great  Russian  armies, 
they  envisaged  as  humanly  disastrous  any  indefinite  prolongation 
of  the  struggle  to  reach  an  Allied  military  decision.  They  believed 
a  just  settlement  could  have  been  secured  by  negotiation  earlier  in 
the  war,  and  they  believed  it  could  be  so  secured  again. 

They  were  poor  military  prophets  as  the  fall  months  proved, 
— poor  comforters  to  a  sorely  put  government  which  had  bungled 
with  the  diplomatic  weapon, — poor  help  to  an  army  fighting 
with  its  back  to  the  wall;  but  they  were  consistent  apostles  of  the 
faith  that  was  in  them,  regardless  of  the  military  map  and  reckless 
of  the  condemnation  of  the  great  majority  of  British  organs  of 
opinion. 

In  the  face  of  the  German  drive  they  stuck  to  a  solution  dia- 
metrically opposed  to  the  principle  that  animated  it — stuck  to  a 
peace  without  victory,  brought  about  by  popular  recoil  in  all  na- 
tions against  the  gruelling  prospect  of  a  peace  by  exhaustion.  They 
urged  it  as  a  recourse  inimical  to  imperialistic  ambition  but  as  a 
recourse  consonant  with  democratic  aims. 

Their  resolution  read: — 

This  conference  of  the  I.  L.  P.  strongly  reaffirms  that  a  demo- 
cratic and  unaggressive  peace  secured  by  negotiation  at  the  earliest 
possible  moment,  alone  can  save  the  nations  from  mutual  destruc- 
tion, ruin,  and  bankruptcy,  and  urges  in  the  interests  of  civiliza- 
tion that  no  opportunity  be  lost  of  examining  honestly  the  possibil- 
ities of  world  settlement;  the  conference  sends  greetings  to  the  men 
and  women  in  all  countries  who  are  working  for  a  peoples'  peace 
without  annexations  or  indemnities,  and  with  the  rights  of  peoples, 
large  or  small,  to  determine  their  own  life,  and  assures  such  men 
and  women  that  the  forces  of  reason  are  rapidly  gathering  strength 
among  the  British  workers;  and  this  conference  denounces  and 
repudiates  the  secret  treaties  to  which  governments  and  rulers  have 
committed  themselves  behind  the  backs  of  their  peoples,  and  insists 
that  such  treaties,  involving  imperialist  conquest  and  territorial  ag- 
gression, are  the  real  stumbling  blocks  to  an  early  and  lasting  peace, 


THE  RIGHT  STRIKES  BACK  219 

and  must  be  swept  away  with  all  governments  that  are  bound  by 
them. 

Obviously  the  I.  L.  P.  was  prepared,  in  pressing  this  course 
al  such  a  time,  to  continue  its  past  record  by  taking  positions  on 
procedure  radically  to  the  left  of  those  taken  by  the  main  body  of 
organized  labor. 

Nor  was  the  turn  events  had  taken  in  line  with  its  earlier 
pioneering  in  international  and  political  affairs  wholly  to  the  liking 
of  the  I.  L.  P.  executive.    And  with  some  cause. 

For  the  labor  movement  to  absorb  the  ferment  the  I.  L.  P.  had 
engendered  when  the  great  organizations  were  quiescent  to  the 
issues  now  engaging  them,  was  one  thing.  To  discard  the  cake  of 
yeast  that  had  been  the  active  principle  of  that  ferment,  was  to 
destroy  its  power  for  leaven  in  the  future.  From  an  organization 
standpoint  the  net  result  of  the  expansion  of  the  Labour  Party  to  • 
include  workers  "by  hand  or  by  brain"  was  to  spread  local  labor 
parties,  catering  in  competition  with  the  I.  L.  P.  branches  to  indi- 
vidual members.  The  net  result  of  the  joint  British  offensive  was 
to  exclude  the  I.  L.  P.  as  such  from  the  Inter-Allied  Conference. 
[Chapter  VII.]  True,  the  I.  L,  P.  had  itself  stood  for  a  policy  of 
exclusion.  From  the  beginning  of  the  war,  it  had  sought  to  obtain 
a  meeting  of  the  International  Socialist  Bureau,  and  it  opposed  the 
proposal  of  the  Labour  Party  to  invite  to  the  Inter-Allied  Confer- 
ence, the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  which  it  described  as  a 
"non-political  body  ineligible  for  affiliation"  to  the  bureau.  Later 
on  the  A.  F.  of  L.,  from  the  opposite  angle,  similarly  attempted  to 
shunt  the  Labour  Party  (with  its  joint  socialist  and  labor  member- 
ship), from  achieving  a  united  front  among  the  dominant  labor 
and  socialist  formations  among  the  Allies.  The  A.  F.  of  L.  wanted 
to  keep  clear  of  the  socialists;  the  I.  L.  P.,  of  the  purely  trade 
union  bodies. 

Analyzing  the  report  made  by  the  administrative  council  of  the 
I.  L.  P.  to  the  Leicester  convention,  the  correspondent  of  the  Chris- 
tian Commonwealth  wrote: — 

Much  the  same  argument  (as  to  the  A.  F.  of  L.)  applies  to 
the  Trades  Union  Congress,  which,  in  conjunction  with  the  Labour 
Party,  shared  responsibility  for  the  convocation  of  the  recent  inter- 
Allied  conference,  and  is  cooperating  in  the  effort  to  convene  a 
general  international  congress.  The  I.  L.  P.  protests  vigorously 
against  the  assumption  of  authority  by  the  joint  committee  of  the 
Trades  Union  Congress  and  the  Labour  Party,  which  has  acted 
(according  to  the  report)  "as  the  sole  representative  of  labor  and 
socialism  in  this  country"  in  the  effort  to  secure  first  national,  then 
inter-Allied,  and,  finally,  international  agreement  on  war  aims.  .  .  . 


220  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

Of  what,  then,  do  the  socialists  complain?  Here  is  positive  achieve- 
ment— an  international  working-class  policy  carried  through  two 
stages  and  within  sight  of  the  third.  The  root  of  the  socialist 
objection  is  that  all  this  has  been  done  not  in  the  name  of  the  Social- 
ist International,  but  in  the  name  of  the  organized  working-class 
movement.  The  independence  of  the  Independent  Labour  Party,  in 
other  words,  has  been  ignored ;  the  socialist  organizations  have 
been  treated  as  part  of  the  working-class  movement.  .  .  . 

And  I  suppose  it  would  continue  its  protest  even  if  it  were  proved 
that  the  policy  it  advocated  not  only  in  international  affairs,  but 
in  relation  to  the  problems  of  social  reconstruction,  is  essentially  the 
policy  that  has  been  adopted  by  the  larger  organization  in  which 
it  is  a  unit. 

In  a  word,  the  I.  L.  P.  is  not  prepared  to  play  the  part  of  a  polit- 
ical John  the  Baptist.  It  is  not  prepared  to  see  the  Labour  Party 
as  the  organ  of  political  democracy  in  this  country  increase  while 
the  I.  L.  P.  itself  diminishes.  The  determination  to  remain  a  sep- 
arate independent  party,  willing  indeed  to  work  with  the  Labour 
Party  to  increase  labor  representation  in  Parliament,  but  unwilling 
to  merge  its  forces  in  the  general  movement  of  organized  labor 
towards  the  conquest  of  political  power — a  movement  to  which  the 
Trades  Union  Congress  now  powerfully  contributes — is  written  large 
on  every  page  of  the  report. 

As  viewed  by  this  correspondent,  "the  quarrel  between  the 
I.  L.  P.  and  the  politically  organized  working-class  movement"  was 
for  the  former,  "literally  a  fight  for  existence."     He  went  on: — 

Mr.  Snowden's  address  from  the  chair  of  the  conference  on 
Monday  was  chiefly  notable  for  his  extraordinary  declaration  against 
a  labor  government,  and  his  approval  of  a  Lansdowne  government. 
He  said  that  the  failure  of  the  Labour  Party  during  the  war  had 
made  a  labor  government  neither  possible  nor  desirable.  Whatever 
might  be  the  personnel  of  the  next  government  it  would  only  be 
a  government  pledged  to  explore  every  avenue  that  might  lead  to 
peace.  This  is  the  Lansdowne  formula,  and  Mr.  Snowden  added  that 
personally  he  would  not  hesitate  to  support  any  government  set  up 
for  that  specific  purpose,  even  if  at  its  head  there  was  a  statesman 
of  aristocratic  and  Tory  tradition.  Thus  Mr.  Snowden  is  not  a 
supporter  of  the  policy  of  working-class  action  formulated  by  the 
labor  and  socialist  parties  in  the  Allied  countries.  He  was  reelected 
as  chairman  of  the  I.  L.  P. 

THE  LABOR  MEMBERS  OF  THE   COALITION 

This  separatist  movement  of  the  extreme  left,  headed  by  Snow- 
den, and  due  in  part  to  its  failure  to  control  the  main  current  of 
the  labor  movement,  was  more  than  matched  by  a  separatist  move- 
ment of  the  extreme  right,  due  in  part  to  an  identical  reason.    And 


THE  RIGHT  STRIKES  BACK  221 

the  two  unquestionably  aggravated  each  other  to  fresh  efforts  at 
reprisal  and  control. 

Barred  out  as  a  constituent  organization  from  the  Inter-Allied 
Conference  and  no  longer  secure  as  such  even  of  a  seat  in  the 
Labour  Party  executive,  the  energies  of  the  I.  L.  P.  were  deflected 
to  the  constituencies  where  it  cheerfully  locked  horns  with  the 
government  labor  following;  with  what  result  was  registered  at  the 
June  (19 1 8)  conference  of  the  Labour  Party.  That  conference  was 
the  first  delegate  assembly  of  the  party  since  the  February  meeting  at 
which  it  discarded  its  old  form  of  a  loose  federation  of  trade  unions, 
small  socialist  societies  and  scattered  local  organizations.  The  sig- 
nificance in  labor  politics  of  this  change  and  the  developments  of 
the  intervening  months  from  February  to  June  were  thus  sum- 
marized from  a  point  of  view  unsympathetic  to  the  I.  L.  P.  by  the 
labor  correspondent  of  the  London  Times  (June  25): — 

Broadly,  it  may  be  said  that,  while  the  socialist  societies  (par- 
ticularly the  Independent  Labour  Party),  working  through  the  local 
organizations,  supplied  much  of  the  driving  power  of  the  movement; 
the  trade  unions,  which  provided  the  greater  part  of  its  funds  and 
membership,  controlled  its  general  policy  through  the  party  confer- 
ences. From  time  to  time  when  the  Independent  Labour  Party  tried 
unduly  to  force  the  pace,  the  trade  unions  resisted,  and  relations 
were  strained.  But  the  Independent  Labour  Party  continued  to 
swallow  its  annoyance  at  defeats  in  conferences  and  to  pursue  its 
policy  of  penetration  in  the  constituencies,  and  the  Labour  Party 
remained  a  heterogeneous  confederation  of  discordant  bodies. 

The  scheme  of  reorganization  accepted  last  February  was  a  step 
towards  the  creation  of  a  homogeneous  national  democratic  party 
which  should  derive  its  solid  support  as  well  as  its  driving  power 
from  branches  or  parties  in  all  the  parliamentary  constituencies.  .  .  . 
The  I.  L.  P.  would  wish  to  see  the  process  hastened,  and  it  is 
doing  its  utmost  to  capture  the  outer  organizations  to  compensate  for 
its  reverses  in  the  central  organization.  That  is  how  it  comes  about 
that  labor  members  of  the  government  who  enjoy  the  confidence 
of  the  main  body  of  trade  unionists  are  finding  themselves  repudiated 
in  their  constituencies,  and  labor  candidates  are  being  put  forward 
against  government  candidates  in  defiance  of  the  party  executive. 
It  is  to  escape  from  the  anomalous  position  in  which  the  executive 
are  thus  placed  that  they  recommend  the  formal  breaking  of  the 
political  truce.  .  .  . 

Just  before  the  June  conference,  the  labor  members  of  the  gov- 
ernment united  in  a  protest  against  breaking  the  truce  and  against 
"sniping."  The  debate  in  which  Henderson,  as  against  both  Barnes 
(on  the  government  right)  and  Smillie  (as  spokesman  for  the  left) 
but  with  the  acquiescence  of  Clynes,  carried  the  day  for  a  working 


222  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

compromise,  has  been  brought  out  in  Chapter  XII.  While  the 
truce  was  broken  in  such  a  way  as  to  keep  the  labor  members  in 
the  Ministry  as  such,  they  received  small  comfort  against  sniping 
in  the  constituencies.  The  difficulties  of  their  position  and  their 
services  to  the  nation  were  portrayed  sympathetically  by  the  Times' 
labor  correspondent.     He  wrote  (June  28): — 

No  one  whose  lot  it  has  been  to  come  in  contact  with  them  can 
fail  to  appreciate  the  way  in  which,  to  the  benefit  of  the  state,  old 
conventions  have  been  jettisoned,  departmental  minuting  scrapped, 
and  official  attention  immediately  directed  to  the  root  of  the  affair 
in  hand.  In  one  particular  respect  they  have  revolutionized  depart- 
mental practice.  They  have  made  themselves  personally  accessible 
to  all  who   have  suggestions  to  make  or  complaints  to  lay. 

Unfortunately  the  labor  world  knows  little  of  the  inner  doings 
of  Whitehall.  What  it  comes  into  direct  contact  with,  and  knows 
intimately,  is  the  labor  administration  of  the  different  departments 
representative  of  government.  There  it  finds  in  some  matters 
regarded  by  labor  as  of  highest  moment  to  the  movement  variant,  and 
in  many  cases  contrary,  principles  in  operation.  T^he  responsibility 
is  generally  most  undeservedly  laid  by  labor  at  the  doors  of  the 
representative  of  government.  .  .  . 

For  instance,  the  recent  government  scheme  for  mobile  labor  is 
not,  it  is  understood,  to  apply  to  shipyards.  Thus  a  boilermaker 
or  an  engineer  comes  under  a  different  regime  and  conditions,  ac- 
cording as  he  is  working  in  a  Ministry  of  Munitions  or  an  Ad- 
miralty firm.  The  trouble  this  breeds  is  obvious.  In  connection 
with  disputes,  the  divergence  of  practice  as  between  the  Ministry 
of  Munitions  and  the  Admiralty  is  still  more  profound. 

.  ,  .  The  existence  of  such  a  state  of  things  impairs  more  than 
can  be  imagined  by  those  not  in  touch  with  industrial  sentiment  the 
status,  with  the  authority  over  labor,  of  the  labor  members  of  the 
government.  The  latter  entered  the  government  as  labor  representa- 
tives in  support  of  such  uniform  national  labor  policy  as  would  win 
the  war;  and  it  is  the  duty  of  the  government,  as  far  as  possible,  to 
vindicate  that  position. 

This  was,  of  course,  not  the  whole  story,  as  shown  by  the  reso- 
lutions offered  at  Nottingham  (Chapter  XII),  demanding  that  the 
labor  members  of  the  government  "come  out."  Not  only  had  they 
to  carry  a  vicarious  load  of  responsibility  for  what  were  regarded 
as  the  anti-union  policies  of  other  administrative  departments,  but 
in  common  with  most  of  the  other  older  officials  of  the  national 
unions,  they  were  associated  with  that  war-time  waiving  of  the  right 
to  strike,  of  trade  union  regulations  and  of  bargaining  machinery 
which  growing  numbers  of  workers  felt  had  stripped  labor  of  its 
old  protections  and  left  it  bare  to  war-time  abuses.    In  the  vernac- 


THE  RIGHT  STRIKES  BACK  223 

ular  of  the  trade  union  hall,  labor  felt  it  had  two  fights  on  its 
hands,  one  against  Prussian  autocracy  and  one  against  industrial 
autocracy  and  profiteering  at  home.  The  resulting  insurgency 
against  the  old  leadership  was  brought  out  in  Chapter  XIV  on  the 
shop  stewards  movement.  In  accepting  lucrative  government  posts, 
labor  officials  were  attacked  as  at  best  acting  as  buffers.  The  fact 
that  Thomas  had  refused  Cabinet  posts,  that  Smiliie  had  done  like- 
wise and  successfully  stood  out  against  any  impairment  of  the 
right  to  strike  in  the  mines,  lent  point  to  these  feelings. 

Now  beyond  that,  by  being  in  the  government,  the  labor  mem- 
bers were  inevitably  associated  in  the  common  mind  with  the  for- 
eign policies  with  which  the  majority  labor  movement  had  broken 
— with  the  mishandling  of  the  Russian  Revolution,  the  tardiness  to 
come  out  into  the  open  with  peace  terms,  the  secret  treaties,  the 
refusal  of  passports  and  the  like.  And  beyond  that,  unlike  Barnes 
(who  subscribed, to  the  league  of  nations  and  the  war  aims  memo- 
randum), certain  of  them  were  spokesmen  for  bitter  assaults  upon 
the  new  democratic  front  of  labor  in  foreign  policy  v,^hich  engaged 
the  rank  and  file ;  unlike  Clynes,  they  were  antagonistic  to  the  whole 
procedure  by  which  it  sought  to  make  its  weight  count.  Their  posi- 
tion was  linked  up  with  that  of  Milner,  Carson,  Balfour,  Curzon. 

Beyond  that  again,  we  must  remember  that  throughout  these 
months,  a  general  election  was  in  the  offing;  and  the  Labour 
Party's  proposals  for  an  unimperialistic  peace  and  its  plan  for 
domestic  reconstruction  were  more  than  academic  or  propaganda 
pronouncements.  They  were  the  platform  of  a  political  party  which 
offered  itself  to  the  electorate  as  an  alternative  to  the  government 
in  power.  This  was  as  little  to  the  liking  of  those  labor  leaders  of 
the  extreme  right,  who  had  cast  in  their  lot  with  Lloyd  George,  as 
it  was  to  Snowden  at  the  extreme  left,  who  proposed  to  cast  in  his 
with  Lansdowne  on  the  war  issue.  It  was  common  talk  that  the 
premier  would  try  to  split  both  labor  and  liberal  camps  and  create  a 
new  party  of  his  own. 

HARBINGERS  OF  ECONOMIC  WAR 

But  beyond  all  these  questions  of  industrial  relations,  demo- 
cratic affiliations  and  party  tactics,  the  ribs  of  great  economic  inter- 
ests showed  through  the  body  politic  of  Great  Britain.  The  old 
fissures  in  public  opinion  between  the  free  traders  and  the  tariff 
reformers  (protectionists)  were  gaping  wider  than  ever;  the  old 
habit  of  aligning  men  by  trade-interests,  vertically,  industry  by 
industry,  nation  by  nation,  rather  than  by  social  classes  at  home 
coupled  with  fellowship  abroad,  was  given  tremendous  sanction  by 


224  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

race  enmities  bred  of  the  war.  The  Labour  Party  had  sensed  this 
in  its  presentment  Labour  and  the  New  Social  Order,  and  driven 
straight  at  it  in  such  passages  as  the  following  on  the  Britannic 
Alliance: — 

We  desire  to  maintain  the  most  intimate  relations  with  the  Labour 
Parties  overseas.  Like  them,  we  have  no  sympathy  with  the  proj- 
ects of  "Imperial  Federation,"  in  so  far  as  these  imply  the  subjec- 
tion to  a  common  Imperial  Legislature  wielding  coercive  power  (in- 
cluding dangerous  facilities  for  coercive  imperial  taxation  and  for 
enforced  military  service),  either  of  the  existing  self-governing 
dominions,  whose  autonomy  would  be  thereby  invaded ;  or  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  whose  freedom  of  democratic  self-development 
would  be  thereby  hampered;  or  of  India  and  the  Colonial  Dependen- 
cies, which  would  thereby  run  the  risk  of  being  further  exploited  for 
the  benefit  of  a  "White  Empire."  We  do  not  intend,  by  any  such 
"Imperial  Senate,"  either  to  bring  the  plutocracy  of  Canada  and 
South  Africa  to  the  aid  of  the  British  aristocracy,  or  to  enable  the 
landlords  and  financiers  of  the  Mother  Country  to  unite  in  con- 
trolling the  growing  popular  democracif  3  overseas.  The  absolute 
autonomy  of  each  self-governing  part  of  the  empire  must  be  main- 
tained intact. 

And  this  on  the  League  of  Nations: — 

As  regards  our  relations  to  foreign  countries,  we  disavow  and 
disclaim  any  desire  or  intention  to  dispossess  or  to  impoverish  any 
other  state  or  nation.  We  seek  no  increase  of  territory.  We  dis- 
claim all  idea  of  "economic  war."  We  ourselves  object  to  all  pro- 
tective customs  tariffs;  but  we  hold  that  each  nation  must  be  left 
free  to  do  what  it  thinks  best  for  its  own  economic  development, 
without  thought  of  injuring  others.  We  believe  that  nations  are  in 
no  way  damaged  by  each  other's  economic  prosperity  or  commer- 
cial progress  but,  on  the  contrary,  that  they  are  actually  themselves 
mutually  enriched  thereby.  We  would  therefore  put  an  end  to  the 
old  entanglements  and  mystifications  of  secret  diplomacy  and  the 
formation   of   leagues   against   leagues. 

It  would  be  entirely  beside  the  mark  to  discount  the  concern 
felt  by  some  British  labor  men  at  the  proposal  of  an  inter-belliger- 
ent labor  conference,  which  they  honestly  regarded  as  playing  into 
the  hands  of  the  enemy;  just  as  it  would  be  entirely  beside  the 
mark  to  discount  the  outraged  feelings  of  individual  members  of 
ships'  crews,  who  refused  to  transport  labor  delegates.  But  it  would 
be  equally  beside  the  mark  to  ignore  the  fact  that  the  three-decker 
tariff  proposed  by  the  industrial  preferentialists  and  the  form  of 
punishment  for  German  naval  crimes  advocated  by  the  Sailors' 
Union    (a  five-year  boycott),  played  into  the  hands  of  interests 


THE  RIGHT  STRIKES  BACK  225 

which  would  profit  most  by  a  commercial  imperialism  kindred,  to 
the  minds  of  the  workers,  in  its  economic  if  not  in  its  political  con- 
cepts, to  the  Prussianism  they  were  fighting,  and  calculated  to  per- 
petuate the  causes  of  race  friction  and  war. 

The  new  majority  was  conscious  that  its  position  might  be  com- 
promised and  its  effective  opposition  routed  by  such  interests  strik- 
ing through  the  labor  leaders  of  the  extreme  right  (the  government 
group)  at  those  of  the  extreme  left. 

Thus,  we  find  John  Hodge,  Minister  of  Pensions,  addressing  a 
meeting  at  Hanley  in  mid-April  of  the  North  Staffordshire  Branches 
of  the  Iron  and  Steel  Trade  Confederation.  After  a  reference  to 
the  Labour  Party,  Hodge  continued: 

That  is  to  say,  if  there  be  a  Labour  Party.  I  have  my  doubts. 
If  you  read  the  debates  in  the  House  of  Commons  last  week  you 
could  not  come  to  the  conclusion  that  there  was  a  Labour  Party. 
One  section  was  in  one  lobby  and  the  other  section  in  the  other. 
One  section  of  the  Labour  Party  talk  about  "their  friends  in  Ger- 
many." .  .  .  Then  they  say  that  men  like  myself,  who  talk  about 
not  giving  an  open  door  to  the  Germans  after  the  war,  are  seeking 
to  perpetuate  an  economic  war.  We  do  not  want  to  do  anything 
of  the  kind,  but  what  we  ask  is  how,  after  the  brutalities  of  the 
Germans  towards  our  peaceful  fishermen  and  our  mercantile  marine, 
after  the  dastardly  acts  with  regard  to  the  Lusitania  and  the  Belgian 
Prince,  after  the  brutal  murder  of  Captain  Fryatt,  can  we  permit 
them  to  come  into  this  country  with  their  goods  after  the  war  as 
they  did  before  it? 

Then,  looking  at  it  from  another  point  of  view,  I  am  not  willing, 
as  a  steel  worker,  and  you  are  not  willing  as  iron  and  steel  workers, 
to  have  furnaces  idle  in  this  country  while  German  steel  is  being 
dumped  into  it.  (Cheers.)  There  must  be  none  of  that.  Not 
until  every  furnace  is  working  and  we  cannot  supply  our  own  needs 
should  we  buy  from  other  people.  .  .  . 

He  was  proud  of  the  magnificent  services  that  the  iron  and  steel 
trades  had  rendered  during  the  war.  They  had  had  no  strikes  or 
lockouts: 

We  iron  and  steel  workers  intend  to  play  our  part  in  reconstruc- 
tion. After  the  war,  strikes  and  lockouts  will  be  catastrophes  to 
all  concerned.  Reason  must  take  the  place  of  all  other  methods  of 
settlement.  I  am  wondering  also  whether,  in  our  own  interest  as 
a  confederation,  the  time  has  not  come  when  we  ought  to  move 
towards  a  trade  union  party  instead  of  that  mongrel,  nondescript 
kind  of  thing  that  we  have  to-day.  You  cannot  blend  oil  and  water, 
and  you  cannot  blend  good,  sound,  honest  trade  unionists  with  the 
professed  friends  of  Germany  who  are  inside  the  party. 


226  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

Thus,  we  find  G.  H.  Roberts,  Minister  of  Labour,  before  the 
Association  of  Trade  Protection  Societies  in  April,  condemning 
"sniping"  and  those  who  "were  continually  advocating  the  policy 
of  civil  war  within  their  own  shores";  find  him  before  the  Eccentric 
Club,  in  response  to  the  toast,  "The  Ministers  of  the  Crown,"  de- 
nouncing the  war  aims  memorandum  of  British  and  Allied  labor: 

So-called  manifestoes  were  being  issued  without  the  concurrence 
of  the  labor  movement  and  without  the  rank  and  file  of  that  move- 
ment being  consulted.  He  was  a  democrat,  and  he  denied  the  right 
of  any  clique  to  speak  in  the  name  of  the  labor  movement  with 
which  he  was  connected  unless  all  the  various  elements  of  that 
movement  were  being  consulted  and  a  ballot  taken  which  could  give 
a  proper  decision.  We  were  told  by  some  people  that  after  the  war 
we  should  help  enemy  nations  to  recover  as  rapidly  as  we  did  our- 
selves. He  was  sufficiently  old-fashioned  to  believe  that  sin  ought 
to  be  punished,  and  that  wrong  ought  to  be  expiated.  The  Central 
Empires  were  alone  responsible  for  the  precipitation  of  this  hor- 
rible catastrophe,  and  they  ought  not  to  be  allowed  to  emerge  from 
this  terrible  struggle  without  paying  the  full  penalty.  He  knew  that 
what  he  was  saying  might  involve  him  in  a  parting  of  the  ways,  but 
he  was  a  British  citizen  before  he  was  a  politician,  and  if  and  when 
he  was  compelled  to  choose  between  his  conception  of  British  citi- 
zenship and  his  association  with  any  political  party  he  would  say 
to  the  party — "Go  hang!  I  am  proud  to  be  a  British  citizen." 
(Cheers.) 

It  had  been  suggested  that  we  ought  to  help  the  enemy  to  recover 
quicker  than  our  own  nation,  but  he  could  not  subscribe  to  any  such 
theory.  His  view  was  "My  own  country  first,  and  the  British  Em- 
pire in  association  therewith;  the  Allies  next."  We  must  arrange 
with  ourselves  and  our  Allies  before  we  had  any  regard  to  the 
others.  .  .  . 

G.  N.  Barnes,  Henderson's  successor  in  the  War  Cabinet,  who 
also  responded  to  the  toast,  said  he  might  content  himself  in  saying 
"ditto"  to  Roberts. 

Thus,  we  find  the  Australian  labor  premier,  Hughes,  in  an  attack 
more  self-revealing  than  those  of  his  British  colleagues,  in  that  it 
was  directed  unmistakably  at  the  new  majority,  and  frankly  waved 
the  bloody  shirt  from  a  flagstaff  of  commercial  monopoly.  In  ad-' 
dressing  a  mass  meeting  of  workers  at  Cardiff,  over  which  Com- 
mander Sir  Edward  Nichol  presided,  he  was  quoted  by  the  London 
Times  (July  22)  as  saying: — 

The  loud  voice  of  the  pacifist  was  heard  in  the  land;  and  by 
pacifist  he  meant  every  man,  whether  he  was  a  German,  a  traitor, 
or  merely  a  visionary  or  a  fool,  who  sought  to  divert  the  nation 


THE  RIGHT  STRIKES  BACK  227 

from  the  path  it  had  sworn  to  follow,  and  deprive  it  of  the  fruits 
of  victory — that  lasting  peace  which  it  had  sworn  to  achieve.  But 
the  pacifist  made  more  noise  than  his  numbers  warranted.  .  .  . 

It  was  impossible  for  the  workers  of  this  or  any  other  country 
to  improve  their  working  conditions  unless  sound  economic  condi- 
tions existed.  And  this  could  only  be  done  by  securing  the  home 
market  and  controlling  the  sources  from  which  the  raw  material 
came.  .  .  . 

"Amongst  those  who  are  opposed  to  a  sound  economic  policy  are 
the  pacifists,"  proceeded  Mr.  Hughes.  "I  am  not  surprised.  A 
sound  economic  policy  for  Britain  means  material  loss  to  Germany, 
and  the  pacifists  seem  to  have  a  tender  regard  for  her  interests. 
'The  Paris  Economic  Conference  resolutions,'  said  Mr.  Henderson, 
'must  be  strenuously  opposed.'  That  is  exactly  what  Germany  said 
to  Russia  at  the  point  of  the  sword.  That  was  how  Germany  ex- 
pressed the  triumph  of  Prussianism.  And  Mr.  Henderson  says 
exactly  the  same  thing.  He  goes  on: — 'British  labor  desires  to 
maintain  the  policy  of  the  open  door.'  And  Germany  also  desires 
us  to  maintain  the  policy  of  the  open  door.  Emil  Zimmerman  says: 
— 'The  rise  of  Germany  is  due  essentially  to  the  British  policy  of 
the  open  door.  Without  that  we  should  be  at  one  stroke  once  more 
the  Germany  of  1870.'  It  is  certainly  curious,  to  say  the  least  of 
it,  that  while  England  and  Germany  are  locked  in  a  life-and-death 
struggle  an  Englishman  should  agree  with  a  German  that  the  policy 
vital  to  the  welfare  of  Germany  should  be  maintained  by  Britain. 
.  .  .  They  seem  to  have  forgotten  facts  that  have  burned  them- 
selves into  our  very  hearts.  Have  they  forgotten  the  murder  of 
unarmed  crews  and  passengers — men,  women,  and  children  sent 
without  warning  to  their  graves?  Have  they  forgotten  that  hos- 
pital ships  were  sunk  and  lifeboats  shelled?  Do  they  not  remember 
how  hospitals  were  bombed?  Have  they  forgotten  how  workers 
were  deported  from  Belgium  and  forced  to  work  for  a  miserable 
pittance  ?  .  .  . 

"There  are  those  leaders  of  labor  who,  although  they  promise 
the  workers  that  they  will  lead  them  into  the  promised  land,  seem 
by  their  attitude  towards  the  war  and  after-the-war  problems  to 
think  that  labor  can  grow  fat  on  a  diet  of  wind  and  platitudes  about 
internationalism.  They  are  dealers  in  words  rather  than  in  deeds — 
men  with  their  heads  in  the  clouds  and  their  feet  in  a  bog.  Labor 
has  done  gloriously  in  this  war;  it  has  proved  its  patriotism  by 
deeds;  it  has  fought  heroically;  the  battlefields  are  red  with  its  blood; 
it  has  endured  and  suffered  much.  Yet  its  courage  has  never  flagged, 
its  resolution  never  faltered.  On  sea  and  land,  labor  has  won  for 
itself  a  sure  place  in  the  heart  of  the  nation." 

"The  welfare  of  labor  and  capital,"  concluded  Mr.  Hughes, 
"alike  absolutely  depend  upon  an  abundant  supply  of  raw  materials 
for  British  industries  and  food.  When  the  war  was  over  there 
would  be  a  fierce  struggle  for  raw  materials.  Germany,  under  the 
Brest-Litovsk   Treaty,    had    compelled    Russia   to    supply   her   with 


228  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

what  she  wanted,  and  in  turn  had  forced  her,  at  the  point  of  the 
bayonet,  to  receive  German  manufactures.  Mr.  Henderson  wanted 
us  to  continue  this  policy.  He  said  it  was  a  good  one,  and  tliat  it 
would  be  very  wrong  to  adopt  the  same  policy  as  Germany  herself 
did.  But  what  did  the  people  of  Britain  say?  He  was  sick  of  this 
canting  humbug  about  internationalism.  Nationalism,  not  interna- 
tionalism, was  the  policy  for  Britain.  We  welcomed  the  civilized 
nations  of  the  earth,  and  our  dearest  hope  was  that  a  firm  and 
enduring  alliance  would  be  made  between  America,  France  and 
Britain.  But  until  Germany  purged  herself  of  her  iniquities,  until 
her  power  to  harm  was  crushed,  we  would  not  treat  her  as  one  of 
the  family  of  nations,  but  as  a  pariah.  .  .  ." 

This  same  column  in  the  Times  reported  briefly  an  address  by 
Arthur  Henderson  the  same  day  before  a  labor  conference  at  Old- 
ham in  which  he 

pleaded  for  a  real  League  of  Nations,  composed  of  all  belligerents 
and  neutrals.  He  said  they  wanted  to  create  an  international  mind 
for  referring  disputes  to  boards  of  conciliation  and  arbitration. 
How  could  they  talk  of  a  family  of  nations  and  at  the  same  time 
about  five  or  ten  years  of  revenge?  Mere  victory  on  the  one  side 
or  the  other  would  not  give  a  settlement  that  was  going  to  make  the 
future  secure  for  progressive  democracy. 

Those  who  said  that  the  Labour  Party  desired  a  German  settle- 
ment told  a  lie.  He  had  supported  the  war  from  the  beginning, 
and  had  made  sacrifices.  Future  security  lay  in  securing  a  world's 
peace  in  the  interest  of  humanity.  .  .  . 

POINTS  OF  ATTACK  UPON  THE  NEW  MAJORITY 

We  have  now  before  us  some  of  the  motivations  at  work  on 
and  in  the  extreme  right  of  the  British  labor  movement. 

Like  much  else  in  human  affairs,  they  were  complex,  ranging 
from  an  elementary  exasperation  at  anything  which  distracted  men's 
minds  from  the  immediate  business  of  "carrying  on,"  to  various 
pitches  of  self-interest  and  mistrust.  These  were  mixed  up  with 
resurgent  longings  for  Anglo-Saxon  dominance  abroad,  and  for  a 
return  to  the  status  quo  ante  of  the  social  structure  at  home. 

If  we  are  to  assume  that  these  motivations  were  consciously 
gathered  up  and  directed  at  the  overthrow  of  the  united  front  of 
British  and  Allied  labor,  built  up  by  the  new  majority,  the  points 
of  attack  which  offered  best  chances  for  success  were  fairly  clear. 
These  would  have  been  to  isolate  the  British  movement  from  its 
natural  fellowship  in  American  labor;  to  establish  instead  relation- 
ships with  the  latter  through  some  "safe"  trade  union  agency;  to 
attempt  to  use  the  Americans  to  flatten  out  the  recalcitrants  at 


THE  RIGHT  STRIKES  BACK  229 

home;  to  effect  a  swing  to  the  right  in  the  Labour  Party  itself, 
and,  failing  that,  to  counter  it  with  a  rival  political  movement  on 
purely  trade  union  lines;  to  break  away  the  great  Trades  Union 
Congress  from  its  alliance  with  the  Labour  Party  on  war  aims,  and 
to  use  the  British  union  most  out  of  touch  with  labor  in  the  indus- 
trial centers  (the  sailors)  and  most  intimately  stirred  by  German 
atrocities,  to  discredit  as  pro-German  the  whole  labor  offensive, 
internally  and  externally,  bag  and  baggage;  engendering  a  popular 
sentiment  that  would  lend  itself  to  a  very  different  world  outlook 
and  a  very  different  home  policy.  Now  this  is  mere  assumption.  It 
is  to  be  presumed  that  these  various  moves  were  instigated  in  dif- 
ferent quarters,  and  for  the  various  motivations  which  have  been 
set  down.  But  it  is  clear  that  they  all  came  to  a  head  in  the  Derby 
Conference  of  the  Trade  Union  Congress  in  September,  19 18.  It 
is  altogether  clear  that  with  Pan-Germanism  playing  by  its  every 
excess  into  the  hands  of  the  opponents  of  the  British  labor  major- 
ity, with  the  power  of  the  British  government  exercised  to  pre- 
vent a  free  interplay  between  British  and  American  labor,  with 
handicaps  thrown  in  the  way  of  Allied  labor — both  by  home  and 
Prussian  governments — in  getting  its  war  aims  through  to  the 
German  workers,  with  the  sailors  and  the  submarine  issue  to  goad 
the  righteous  wrath  of  British  men,  with  a  great  military  victory 
reported  in  the  midst  of  the  Congress  and  rousing  it  to  cheers  and 
congratulatory  cables,  with  Hughes  and  Gompers  on  the  ground 
standing  for  a  contrary  labor  leadership,  they  had  their  best  chance 
for  success.  And  it  is  clear  most  of  all  that  they  did  not  succeed. 
They  failed  utterly.  The  new  majority  held.  The  British  work- 
ers continued  to  "get  on  with  the  war,"  but  they  continued  with 
their  master  distinction  between  the  German  workers  and  that 
German  government  which,  in  pre-war  days,  had  thwarted  so  suc- 
cessfully efforts  toward  political  and  industrial  freedom  and  might 
be  supposed  not  to  have  loosened  its  grip  in  wartime.  They  de- 
termined to  go  on  with  their  international  procedure,  like  tapping 
at  the  walls  of  entombed  miners.  They  stood  their  ground  on  free 
trade,  and  they  disposed  of  the  separatist  movements  on  the  ex- 
treme right  in  the  ways  which  were  set  down  in  the  last  chapter. 
The  American  context  of  these  things  will  appear  in  the  chapters 
succeeding. 


CHAPTER   XIX 

AMERICAN   LABOR   OUT   OF   IT 

The  American  Federation  of  Labor  believes  in  open  diplomacy, 
as  witness  the  publication  in  the  American  Federationist  of  its  in- 
ternational correspondence.  Or,  more  correctly,  an  open  season, 
for  it  publishes  this  in  occasional  batches.  The  issue  for  Novem- 
ber, 19 1 7,  contained,  for  example,  the  exchanges  prior  to  America's 
entry  into  the  war — Gompers'  cable  of  February  4,  191 7,  to  Carl 
Legien,  secretary  of  the  General  Commission  of  German  Trade 
Unions,  asking  him  if  he  could  not 

prevail  upon  the  German  government  to  avoid  a  break  with  the 
United  States  and  thereby  prevent  universal  conflict; 

Legien's  answer  of  February  11,  in  which  he  cited  Germany's  offer 
of  peace  negotiations  and  "the  enemy's  frankly  avowed  aims  at 
destruction  of  Germany,"  claimed  that  no  labor  intervention  on 
his  part  had  chance  of  success  "unless  America  prevails  upon  Eng- 
land to  discontinue  starvation  war,"  and  appealed  to  American 
labor 

not  to  allow  themselves  to  be  catspaws  of  war-mongers  by  sailing 
war  zone  and  thus  contribute  extending  conflict; 

together  with  Gompers'  final  warning  of  April  2: — 

.  .  .  We  are  all  doing  our  level  best  to  avert  actual  war  and  we 
have  the  right  to  insist  that  the  men  of  labor  of  Germany  exert  their 
last  ounce  of  effort  to  get  your  government  to  make  an  immediate 
and  satisfactory  avowal  that  shall  save  all  from  America's  entrance 
into  the  universal  conflict. 

But,  more  pertinently  to  the  matters  in  hand,  the  issues  of  the 
American  Federationist  afford  a  fresh  background  to  the  incidents 
of  19 18,  in  their  documentation  of  the  exchanges  which  had  been 
going  forward  for  three  years  looking  to  a  resumption  of  interna- 
tional relations  between  distinctly  trade  union  bodies,  exchanges 
which  at  times  paralleled  the  Socialist  efforts  centering  around 
Stockholm. 

Before  the  war  (Chapter  III),  the  International  Federation  of 
Trades  Unions  (I.  F.  T.  U.)  (Internationaler  Gewerkschaftsbund — 
I.  G.  B.)  included  the  French  Confederation  Generale  du  Travail, 

230 


AMERICAN  LABOR  OUT  OF  IT  231 

the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  the  General  Commission  of 
German  Trade  Unions,  the  General  Federation  of  Trade  Unions 
(Great  Britain),  and,  in  general,  the  other  distinctly  trade  union 
bodies  throughout  Europe.  [The  British  Trades  Union  Congress, 
however,  held  aloof.]  Its  president  was  Carl  Legien  and  its  offices 
were  in  Berlin.  It  was  entirely  distinct  from  the  Socialist  "Inter- 
national" which  more  cautiously  had  headquarters,  chairman  and 
secretary  in  neutral  Belgium. 

In  19 1 4,  the  Philadelphia  convention  of  the  American  Federation 
of  Labor  proposed  an  international  labor  conference  to  sit  con- 
currently with  the  Peace  congress.  Favorable  replies  came  from 
French,  Australian  and  South  African  organizations;  "from  Germany 
came  an  opinion  that  such  a  plan  was  impracticable." 

In  191 5,  the  San  Francisco  convention  reaffirmed  this  proposal. 
Its  rejection  by  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  (in  spite  of 
a  favorable  report  by  its  parliamentary  committee)  was  recounted 
in  the  earlier  chapter.  This  was  at  Birmingham  before  the  "swing 
toward  the  left."  The  General  Federation  of  Trade  Unions  of 
Great  Britain  also  rejected  it  at  the  time,  and  thereafter  stayed  put 
on  the  extreme  right. 

In  191 6,  the  Baltimore  convention  put  forward  the  further 
suggestion  that  "all  international  labor  organizations  urge  upon 
their  national  governments  the  justice  of  including  in  their  national 
delegation  to  the  World  Peace  Congress,  when  it  is  held,  repre- 
sentatives of  the  workers  of  their  country."  The  American  Federa- 
tionist  of  January,  191 7,  brought  out  correspondence  with  W.  A. 
Appleton,  secretary  of  the  General  Federation  of  Trades  Unions 
of  Great  Britain,  enthusiastically  endorsing  this  suggestion;  but  it 
was  not  for  10  months,  or  until  the  December  following,  that  the 
reply  sent  January  30,  191 7,  by  Jouhaux  of  the  general  confederation 
of  French  workers  was  brought  out,  regretting  that  the  American 
federation  had  "abandoned  your  first  proposition  which  had  been 
accepted  by  it  and  gave  it  much  satisfaction."  The  French  con- 
federation endeavored  to  reopen  this  earlier  proposal,  asking 
Gompers  to  submit  to  his  organization  a  proposal  for  an  exchange 
of  views  preceding  the  peace  congress  to  "enable  the  delegates  to 
place  themselves  in  accord  upon  the  general  principles  they  will  de- 
fend." 

Thus,  in  191 7,  a  proposal  for  an  interbelligerent  labor  confer- 
ence came  to  the  American  Federation  two  months  before  Amer- 
ica's entry  into  the  war,  from  an  Allied,  as  distinct  from  a  German, 
quarter,  trade  union  as  distinct  from  socialist,  French  as  distinct 
from  British. 

No  reply  by  the  American  body  was  published  in  the  Federation- 


232  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

ist,  but  on  March  28,  191 7,  a  circular  letter  was  sent  out  by  The 
Schweizer  Gewerkschaftsbund — Union  Suisse  Des  Federations  Syn- 
dicales — in  "compliance  with  a  wish  of  our  French  comrades."  They 
addressed  the  "National  Centers  of  Trade  Unions"  of  America,  Eng- 
land, France,  Italy,  Spain  and  Belgium,  proposing  an  international 
meeting  at  Berne.^  In  moving  as  neutrals,  Swiss  labor  suggested  a 
conference  to  discuss  proposals  put  out  by  a  conference  of  Allied 
labor  held  at  Leeds  in  July,  1916;  to  decide  on  the  domicile  of  the 
I.  G.  B.,  and  on  the  continuation  of  the  International  Trade  Union 
Correspondence.  From  personal  information,  wrote  the  Swiss  sec- 
retary, they  knew  that  Italian,  Spanish,  Austrian,  Hungarian,  Dutch, 
Danish,  Norwegian  and  Scandinavian  trade  union  bodies  would  fol- 
low their  initiative,  and  the  meeting  therefore  "would  depend  on  the 
consent  of  America,  England  and  France."  With  respect  to  an 
English  delegation,  they  thought  "it  most  advisable  to  invite  not 
only  the  General  Federation  of  Trade  Unions,  but  also  the  Trades 
Union  Congress,  i.  e.,  its  Parliamentary  Committee,  representing,  as 
it  does,  the  greater  part  of  the  English  trade  union  movement," — a 
significant  paragraph  in  the  light  of  developments.  The  British 
General  Federation  declined  to  attend;  but  the  French  confederal 
committee  decided  June  4  in  favor  of  the  conference  (set  for  Septem- 
ber 17,  191 7)  and  proposed  a  prior  meeting,  also  at  Berne,  of  the  cen- 
tral organizations  of  the  Entente  countries.  Appleton  cabled  Gompers 
on  July  2  that  the  British  General  Federation  was  still  opposed  ^  and 
asked  the  Americans  to  await  a  written  report  of  its  delegates 

^  They  recited : 

— That  "the  attempts  made  by  some  representatives  of  the  Entente 
through  the  intervention  of  America  in  the  year  1915  to  revive  the  Inter- 
national Federation  of  Trade  Unions  by  removing  its  headquarters  to  a 
neutral  country  had  been  without  result" ; 

— That  a  "later  proposition  of  America  to  hold  an  international  trade 
union  conference  for  the  pronouncement  of  the  workers'  demands  at  the 
same  time  and  place  as  the  general  peace  congress"  .  .  .  "was  not  found 
expedient  either  by  the  trade  unions  of  the  countries  of  the  Entente,  of 
the  Central  Powers,  or  by  those  of  the  neutral  countries"  as  "such  a 
proposal  could  only  have  a  practical  result  if  it  were  possible  to  work  out 
a  joint  program  preliminary  to  the  international  conference"; 

— That  a  first  step  in  this  direction  was  made  by  conference  of  allied 
labor  at  Leeds  in  July,  1916,  which  worked  out  a  "regular  peace  pro- 
gram," thereafter  submitted  to  all  national  centers;  and  decided  to 
establish  a  bureau  of  correspondence  at  Paris;  and 

— That  the  subsequent  effort  of  Legien,  as  president  of  the  I.  G.  B„ 
himself  to  call  a  conference  at  Berne  in  December,  1916,  was  abandoned, 
as  it  was  "very  doubtful  whether  the  trades  unions  of  the  countries  of 
the  Entente  would  follow  the  invitation." 

^  This  report  recounted  that : 

"The  Americans  more  than  a  year  ago  suggested  international  confer- 
ences of  workers  to  determine  the  conditions  of  peace.    The  General  Fed- 


AMERICAN  LABOR  OUT  OF  IT  233 

(James  O'Grady,  Alfred  Short,  W.  A.  Appleton)  just  returned 
from  Paris.  This  report  was  a  characteristic  diagnosis  of  the 
temper  of  French  labor  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  extreme  Brit- 
ish right.  It  ascribed  the  action  of  the  French  confederation  to 
"war  weariness,"  "loss  of  faith  in  their  military  and  political  lead- 
ers," and  the  activity  of  the  minority  in  "supporting  strikes  and 
spreading  discontent."  It  argued  that  the  Central  Powers  "would 
be  likely  to  secure  the  votes  of  Holland,  Denmark,  Norway,  Sweden, 
Finland,  Germany,  Austria,  Hungary  and  Bulgaria."  In  line  with 
the  committee's  recommendations,  the  annual  general  council  of  the 
British  Federation  (Gloucester,  July,  191 7)  declined  the  invitation 
to  Berne,  but  urged  the  American  Federation  to  attend  the  prior 
conference  of  Allied  trade  union  bodies  which  it  had  now  arranged 
with  the  French  C.  G.  T.  should  be  held  in  London  September  10, 
in  order  to  facilitate  American  participation.  This  preliminary  inter- 
Allied  trade  union  meeting  was  apparently  favored  by  some  not  as 
a  stepping-stone,  but  as  a  stumbling  block  to  any  subsequent  inter- 
national gathering.  Various  cables  from  French  and  English  sources 
indicated  that  leaders  of  the  right  looked  to  the  presence  of  the 
A.  F.  of  L.  at  this  meeting  as  a  deciding  factor  against  Allied  rep- 
resentation not  only  at  Berne,  but  at  Stockholm — which,  in  this  mid- 
summer of  191 7,  was  the  prime  question  agitating  European  labor 
bodies  and  ministries  alike.  Henderson  was  quitting  the  British 
cabinet  on  the  issue  of  an  international  labor  meeting  and  the  sit- 
uation in  France  was  almost  as  tense. 

Gompers  cabled  acceptance  to  Appleton,  the  A.  F.  of  L.  desig- 
nating as  representatives  its  fraternal  delegates  to  the  annual  meet- 
ing early  in  September  (191 7)  of  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress 
at  Blackpool.  Now,  this  inter-Allied  trade  union  conference  of  Sep- 
tember 10,  arranged  by  the  minor  British  General  Federation,  with 
its  purely  obstructive  attitude  toward  the  international  conferences 
called  by  neutrals  at  Berne  and  Stocldiolm,  was  one  in  which  the 
major  British  Trades  Union  Congress  decided  to  have  no  part. 
The  Blackpool  Congress,  its  Parliamentary  Committee  fresh  from 
another  loosely  hung  inter-Allied  meeting  in  August,  decided  rather 
to  cast  in  its  lot  with  the  British  Labour  Party;  begin  at  the  bot- 
tom and,  as  told  in  Parts  I  and  II,  seek  first  to  achieve  unity  in 
war  aims  between  the  two  great  British  labor  formations,  indus- 
trial and  political;  on  the  sohd  basis  of  that  unity  seek,  next,  to 
achieve  unity  among  the  dominant  Allied  bodies,  socialist  and  trade 
union  alike;  and  on  the^  solid  basis  of  that  unity,  lay  down  on  their 

eration  of  Trade  Unions  regarded  this  as  impracticable  and  we  refused 
any  conference  with  Germans  while  the  German  army  occupied  Belgium 
and  Northern  France." 


234  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

own  lines  an  inter-belligerent  meeting  while  the  war  was  on.  The 
active  participation  of  the  French  trade  unionists  (the  C.  G.  T.)  in 
this  joint  affirmative  Socialist-labor  offensive  during  the  succeed- 
ing twelve  months  was  at  every  point  in  contrast  with  the  stand- 
off position  throughout  of  the  American  (the  A.  F.  of  L.).  Mean- 
while the  committee  of  neutral  socialists  at  Stockholm  recognized 
this  taking  over  of  the  initiative  on  the  part  of  British  and  Allied 
labor  as  an  exercise  of  the  principle  of  self-determination  and  stood 
ready  to  cooperate  in  the  changed  procedure. 


THE  TWO  STOCKHOLMS 

The  prompt  and  sweeping  condemnation  by  the  American  Fed- 
eration of  Labor  of  the  initial  Stockholm  project  and  its  attitude 
toward  subsequent  international  conference  proposals  in  191 7  is 
clear  from  cables  published  in  the  American  Federationist. 

In  March  and  April,  191 7,  Gompers  had  sent  fraternal  greetings 
to  the  Russian  workers,  acclaiming  the  proclamation  of  the  pro- 
visional government  and  hailing  their  newly  achieved  liberty.  On 
May  6,  he  sent  a  long  cable  to  the  Workmen's  and  Soldiers'  Council 
of  Deputies,  at  Petrograd,  reaffirming  that  the  "American  govern- 
ment, the  American  people,  the  American  labor  movement  are  whole- 
heartedly with  the  Russian  workers,"  denying  "false  reports  of 
an  American  purpose  and  of  American  opinion"  to  the  contrary  and 
denouncing  the  "false  pretences  and  underground  plotting"  of  the 
German  socialists  to  bring  about  "an  abortive  peace"  through  "pre- 
tended international  conferences  at  the  instigation  and  connivance  of 
the  Kaiser."  On  May  8,  he  sent  identical  cablegrams  to  the  Con- 
federation Generale  du  Travail,  the  French  Socialists  and  the  Brit- 
ish Labour  Party: — 

As  you  know,  the  most  insidious  influences  are  at  work  not  only 
to  create  a  pro-Kaiser  propaganda  but  also  to  divide  and  alienate 
from  one  another  the  nations  and  peoples  fighting  for  the  freedom 
and  democracy  of  the  world.  It  is  your  duty  as  it  is  the  duty  of  all 
to  impress  upon  all  labor  organizations  of  European  neutral  coun- 
tries the  truth  about  the  pretended  international  socialist  congress 
called  to  be  held  at  Stockholm.  It  should  be  emphasized  that  it 
does  not  represent  the  working  class  of  America,  England,  France 
or  Belgium,  but  was  called  by  the  German  socialists  and  certain 
other  notoriously  pro-German  agitators  in  other  countries  either  to 
bring  about  a  Kaiser-dictated  peace  under  the  deceptive  catch- 
phrase  "no  annexations,  no  indemnities,"  or  in  the  hope  of  deceiving 
the  Russian  socialists  into  betraying  the  great  western  democracies 
into  consenting  to  a  separate  peace.     It  was  for  the  above  reason? 


AMERICAN  LABOR  OUT  OF  IT  235 

1  cabled  yesterday  direct  to  the  Council  of  Workmen's  and  Soldiers' 
Deputies  at  Petrograd. 

This  was  the  "Socialist  Stockholm";  arranged  by  the  Dutch- 
Scandinavian  committee  of  which  the  pro-Ally  Branting  was  chair- 
man, and  the  Belgian  Huysmans  secretary;  to  which  American  so- 
cialists, as  in  pre-war  international  party  conferences,  were  invited 
but  for  which  their  delegates  were  refused  passports  by  the  U.  S. 
government.  Gompers  identified  the  conference  with  the  anti- 
war position  taken  at  St.  Louis  in  March  by  the  American  Social- 
ist Party,  which  would  have  been  represented  to  the  exclusion  of 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  and  his  partizanship  showing 
through  his  patriotism  in  spots,  transferred  wholesale  to  Stockholm 
his  denunciation  (as  pro-German)  of  his  long-time  antagonists  in 
the  American  socialist  movement. 

British  labor  was  equally  opposed  to  the  Stockholm  conference 
at  the  time  (spring  of  191 7);  and  equally  alive  to  the  possibility 
that  the  German  Majority  Socialists  might  endeavor  to  exploit  it 
to  the  disadvantage  of  the  Allies.  But  because  the  Germans  had 
exploited  the  American  inventions  of  submarines  and  airplanes  was 
no  reason  why  the  Allies  should  not  employ  them.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  the  Stockholm  conversations  that  were  actually  held,  operated 
against  intrigue  and  to  the  advantage  of  the  Allied  workers.  In- 
stead of  acting  as  a  cover  for  the  German  majority  group,  they 
brought  out  into  the  open  the  hollowness  of  some  of  its  positions 
which  were  exposed  by  the  German  minority  delegation.  The  Brit- 
ish labor  leaders  recognized  the  good  faith  of  the  neutral  group 
which  promoted  the  Stockholm  meetings,  and  also  the  construc- 
tive worth  of  its  working  principle  as  a  means  for  free  com- 
munication and  common  understanding,  when  in  August,  191 7, 
in  conjunction  with  the  French  and  Russian  socialist  and  labor 
groups,  they  agreed  to  attend  a  consultative  conference  which  they 
felt  would  preserve  that  principle  and  safeguard  against  its  abuse. 
Good  faith  and  principle  were  again  recognized  when,  later,  they 
set  going  the  much  more  deliberate  and  controlled  procedure  of 
their  own,  in  which,  at  its  final  stage,  they  proposed  to  make  use 
of  the  neutral  offices  of  three  members  of  the  Stockholm  committee 
— Branting,  Troelstra  and  Huysmans.  American  labor  apparently 
never  apprehended  these  radical  distinctions  of  principle  and  pro- 
cedure but  contented  itself  with  a  simpler  method  of  separating  the 
sheep  from  the  goats — as  illustrated  by  the  American  exchanges  with 
respect  to  a  contemporaneous  conference  proposal. 

This  was  the  "Trade  Union  Stockholm,"  which  (June  6,  191 7) 
sent  a  message  signed  not  only  by  Oudegeest  (Holland),  and  Lind- 


236  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

quist  (Sweden),  but  by  Legien,  Bauer  and  Sassenbach  (Germany), 
Hueber  (Austria),  Jasza  (Hungary)  and  Sakaroff  (Bulgaria),  as 
well  as  by  representatives  from  Denmark,  Norway  and  Finland, 
inviting  the  American  Federation  to  an  adjourned  meeting.  They 
received  a  non-committal  cable  in  reply  asking  what  international 
trade  union  centers  were  to  be  invited.  The  reader  cannot  escape 
the  impression  that  the  presence  of  socialists  rather  than  of  Germans 
in  such  an  international  gathering  was  Gompers'  reliable  touchstone! 
He  cabled  Appleton  that  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  answer  the 
invitation  definitely  at  once;  meanwhile  he  would  be  pleased  to 
have  word  from  him.  The  adverse  position  of  the  British  Federa- 
tion was  learned,  and  the  executive  council  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  on 
June  27  in  turn  rejected  the  trade  union  Stockholm  project  "as 
premature  and  untimely";  it  could  "lead  to  no  good  purpose."  ^ 

None  the  less,  in  May,  James  Duncan,  first  vice-president  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor,  had  carried  a  letter  of  greeting  from 
American  labor  to  the  "workers  and  people"  of  Russia,  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Root  Mission,  and  on  June  13,  Gompers  cabled  him: — 

Cablegrams  from  Petrograd  published  in  American  newspapers 
of  June  II  contain  information  that  a  conference  has  been  called  at 
Petrograd  to  consider  advisability  of  calling  a  congress  of  socialistic 
bodies  and  federations  of  trade  unions  of  the  world.  The  credential 
issued  to  you  by  Executive  Council,  American  Federation  of  Labor, 
authorizes  you  to  participate  in  such  conference,  and  if  invited,  you 
are  advised  to  accept  and  participate.  The  American  Federation  of 
Labor  is  the  most  democratically  organized  and  controlled  labor 
movement  in  the  world,  and  of  course  you  will  insist  upon  accept- 
ance of  fundamental  principles  of  democracy  for  every  country; 
also  the  necessity  for  all  the  peoples  of  each  country,  large  and 
small,  to  live  their  own  lives  and  work  out  their  own  destiny.  The 
cause  for  which  America  entered  the  war  was  to  safeguard  these 
principles,  and  much  as  we  desire  peace,  no  false  notions  should 
prevail.  The  world  cannot  longer  endure  half  autocracy  and  half 
democracy;  either  the  one  or  the  other  will  prevail,  and  American 
labor  is  in  the  fight  for  the  destruction  of  autocracy  and  for  the 
victorious  universal  establishment  and  maintenance  of  democracy. 

In  July  (191 7)  the  cables  to  America  fairly  hummed  with  invi- 
tations— from  Huysmans  at  Stockholm,  inviting  the  A.  F.  of  L. 

*  Human  nature  cropped  out  in  the  concluding  paragraph  of  Gompers' 
reply  to  Lindquist : 

"If  an  international  trade  union  conference  is  to  be  held,  it  should  be 
at  a  more  opportune  time  than  the  present  or  the  immediate  future,  and 
in  any  event  the  proposals  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  for 
international  conference  should  receive  further  and  more  sympathetic 
consideration.     Shall  be  glad  to  continue  correspondence." 


AMERICAN  LABOR  OUT  OF  IT  237 

to  the  postponed  international  conference  called  by  the  socialist 
neutrals — in  regard  to  which  Gompers  wanted  more  information; 
from  Jouhaux  at  Paris  (July  23),  asking  his  opinion  on  the  sum- 
moning of  "all  organized  factions  by  the  Russian  Soviet," — which 
Gompers  held  could  not  "at  this  time  or  in  the  near  future  be 
productive  of  good";  from  Appleton,  at  London,  urging  the  A.  F. 
of  L.  to  attend  the  inter-Allied  trade  union  conference  he  had  ar- 
ranged with  the  French  C.  G.  T.  for  September  10  in  London, — 
which,  as  we  have  noted,  Gompers  accepted;  from  Henderson,  at 
London  (July  26),  inviting  delegates  to  an  Inter- Allied  and  Social- 
ist Conference  of  August  8 — to  which  Gompers  cabled  regrets  as  the 
time  was  too  short;  and  from  Henderson  in  reply,  setting  the  dates 
over  to  August  28  and  29.  Nor  were  dates  the  only  thing  at  issue.^ 
Clearly  there  was  a  jurisdictional  dispute  on,  such  as  has  been  the 
order  of  business  in  labor  conventions  since  the  beginning  of  time, 
but  on  an  international  scale  worthy  of  such  past  masters  as  Gom- 
pers and  Henderson.  Gompers  wanted  to  bar  out  the  American  So- 
cialists and  bring  in  the  British  General  Federation.  Henderson 
replied  that  they  would  not  "exclude  American  Socialist  Party"  and 
"that  the  Labour  Party  and  the  Trades  Union  Congress  represented 
British  organized  labor."  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Henderson's  August 
(191 7),  conference  did  not  get  anywhere    [Chapter  II],  Apple- 

*  Gompers'  reply  read  : 

"It  is  possible  American  Federation  of  Labor  delegates  can  reach 
London  August  28,  and  if  entering  into  conference  cannot  submit  co 
representation  of  any  other  body  claiming  to  represent  United  States 
Workers.  American  Trade  Union  movement  has  three  and  one-half 
million  members  and  cannot  divide  responsibility  with  any  other  body 
claiming  to  represent  American  labor  movement." 

In  the  meantime  Appleton  had  cabled : 

"General  Federation  of  Trade  Unions  not  consulted  concerning  Labour 
Party  Coiiference.  Russian  delegates  made  no  communication  officially 
or  unofficially  to  Jouhaux  or  myself.  Management  committee  still  op- 
posed to  conference  with  enemy  delegates  unless  conference  is  preceded 
by  German  government's  undertaking  to  evacuate  France  and  Belgium 
and  make  reparation." 

Gompers  replied  to  Appleton : 

"Your  cablegram  received.  Have  also  received  cablegram  from  Hen- 
derson strongly  urging  our  federation  delegates  to  attend  conference  28, 
29.     I  have  sent  him  following  cable  reply : 

"  'Appleton  informs  me  neither  British  General  Federation  Trade 
Unions  of  Jouhaux  of  Confederation  Generale  du  Travail,  France,  have 
been  consulted  in  calling  or  preparing  for  or  participating  in  the  confer- 
ence your  party  has  called.  How  can  American  Federation  of  Labor 
regard  such  a  conference  as  representing  labor? 

"  'Our  delegates  will  attend  London  conference  labor  representatives 
of  Allied  countries  beginning  September  10.  Delegates  are  John  Golden, 
James  Lord.' " 


238  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

ton's  September  (191 7)  conference  apparently  died  aborning;  and 
it  was  a  full  year  before  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  and  the 
two  great  British  bodies  sat,  in  session  together.  Then  each  domi- 
nant group,  apparently  by  tacit  agreement  and  against  the  ma- 
nceuvering  of  the  British  right  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  French 
left,  on  the  other,  was  left  master  in  its  own  house.  Neither  the 
American  Socialists  nor  the  British  Federation  as  such  were  among 
those  present! 

But  this  American- Allied  conference  (London,  September, 
1918;  Chapter  XXII)  was  a  reconvened  meeting  of  that  Inter- 
Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference  (London,  February,  19 18, 
Chapter  VIII)  which  the  British  had  built  up  in  the  teeth  of  bitter 
resistance  and  prejudice  when,  at  Blackpool,  they  determined  to 
make  a  fresh  start,  distinct  on  the  one  hand  from  the  efforts  to 
secure  an  international  socialist  conference  along  pre-war  lines  at 
Stockholm  and  distinct,  on  the  other  hand,  from  the  efforts  to  se- 
cure an  international  trade  union  conference  along  pre-war  lines  at 
Berne.  It  was  this  new  front  of  Allied  labor,  closed  ranks  of  social- 
ists and  trade  unionists  alike,  resistant  to  German  militarism  and 
insistent  on  outflanking  it  with  an  offensive  of  democratic  ideas, 
which,  throughout  the  intervening  twelve  months,  American  labor 
was  "out  of." 

THE  BREAK  ON  PROCEDURE 

Throughout  this  period  (September,  191 7 — September,  1918) 
the  British  leaders  believed  they  were  in  close  step  with  President 
Wilson  in  their  war  aims  and  cited  the  common  ground  covered  by 
their  memorandum  of  December  27,  191 7,  and  his  fourteen  points 
of  January  8,  19 18.  At  a  time  when  the  American  president  was 
taking  the  lead  in  a  freer  and  more  democratic  statesmanship,  Amer- 
ican labor  hung  back  in  throwing  its  weight  alongside  Allied  labor 
in  the  new  alignment  of  the  forces  for  democracy  among  the  Allied 
nations. 

True,  at  its  Buffalo  convention  in  November,  19 17,  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  had  adopted  the  following  formulation  of  peace 
terms: — 

1.  The  combination  of  the  free  peoples  of  the  world  in  a  com- 
mon covenant  for  genuine  and  practical  cooperation  to  secure  jus- 
tice and  therefore  peace  in  relations  between  nations. 

2.  Governments  derive  their  just  power  from  the  consent  of  the 
governed. 

3.  No  political  or  economic  restrictions  meant  to  benefit  some 
nations  and  to  cripple  or  embarrass  others. 


AMERICAN  LABOR  OUT  OF  IT  239 

4.  No  indemnities  or  reprisals  based  upon  vindictive  purposes 
or  deliberate  desire  to  injure,  but  to  right  manifest  wrongs. 

5.  Recognition  of  the  rights  of  small  nations  and  of  the  prin- 
ciple, "No  people  must  be  forced  under  sovereignty  under  which  it 
does  not  wish  to  live." 

6.  No  territorial  changes  or  adjustment  of  power  except  in  fur- 
therance of  the  welfare  of  the  peoples  affected  and  in  furtherance 
of  world  peace. 

In  addition  to  these  basic  principles,  which  are  based  upon  dec- 
larations of  our  President  of  these  United  States,  there  should  be 
incorporated  in  the  treaty  that  shall  constitute  the  guide  of  nations 
in  the  new  period  and  conditions  into  which  we  enter  at  the  close 
of  the  war  the  following  declarations  fundamental  to  the  best  inter- 
ests of  all  nations  and  of  vital  importance  to  wage-earners: 

1.  No  article  or  commodity  shall  be  shipped  or  delivered  in 
international  commerce  in  t'le  production  of  which  children  under 
the  age  of  16  have  been  c  .ployed  or  permitted  to  work. 

2.  It  shall  be  declared  that  the  basic  workday  in  industry  and 
commerce  shall  not  exceed  eight  hours. 

3.  Involuntary  servitude  shall  not  exist  except  as  a  punishment 
for  crime  whereof  the  party  shall  have  been  duly  convicted. 

4.  Establishment  of  trial  by  jury. 

Early  in  the  new  year  (1918),  British  labor  sent  out  its  invi- 
tations to  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference  in  Lon- 
don in  February.  On  the  receipt  of  such  an  invitation,  the  execu- 
tive council  of  the  A.  F,  of  L.  drew  up  a  statement  on  "Labor's  War 
Aims"  which  contained  this  paragraph: — 

The  common  people  everywhere  are  hungry  for  wider  oppor- 
tunities to  live.  They  have  shown  their  willingness  to  spend  or  be 
spent  for  an  ideal.  They  are  in  this  war  for  ideals.  Those  ideals 
are  best  expressed  by  their  chosen  representative  in  a  message  de- 
livered to  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  January  8,  setting  forth 
the  program  of  the  world's  peace.  President  Wilson's  statement  of 
war  aims  has  been  unreservedly  endorsed  by  British  organized  labor. 
It  is  in  absolute  harmony  with  the  fundamentals  endorsed  by  the 
Buffalo  convention  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 

But  this  statement  of  the  Executive  Council  (published  in  the 
March  Fedcrationist)  went  outside  the  formulation  of  war  aims  at 
the  Buffalo  convention  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  in  November,  and  took 
a  position  on  the  question  of  procedure.  This  position  was  adverse 
to  that  adopted  the  same  month  (February)  by  Allied  labor  at  Lon- 
don: it  discarded  the  weapon  of  labor  diplomacy.    To  quote: — 

We  regret  that  circumstances  make  impossible  continuous  close 
personal   relations  between   the   workers  of  America  and  those  of 


240  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

the  allied  countries,  and  that  we  cannot  have  representation  in  the 
Inter-Allied  Labour  Conference  about  to  convene  in  London. 

Their  cause  and  purpose  are  our  cause  and  purpose.  We  cannot 
meet  with  representatives  of  those  who  are  aligned  against  us  in 
this  world  war  for  freedom,  but  we  hope  they  will  sweep  away 
the  barriers  which  they  have  raised  between  us.  Freedom  and  the 
downfall  of  autocracy  must  come  in  Middle  Europe. 

We  doubly  welcome  the  change  if  it  come  through  the  workers 
of  those  countries.  .  .  . 

Just  there  was  the  crux  of  the  whole  British  labor  procedure — 
to  provoke  that  change  by  massing  and  transmitting  evidences  of 
unselfish  intentions,  coupled  with  assurances  of  fair  play,  should 
the  German  workers  assert  themselves  toward  the  same  ends.  Shut 
off  themselves  for  four  years  from  free  communication,  the  British 
workers  did  not  have  to  be  told  how  ignorance  befriended  reaction. 
Nationalists  themselves,  they  did  not  have  to  be  told  how  lack  of 
such  assurances  must  put  a  damper  on  political  uprising  even  against 
an  autocracy.  These  things  played  into  the  hands  of  the  Junkers, 
no  less  than  piling  up  recriminations  and  threats  which  drove  a  peo- 
ple back  upon  its  instinct  for  self-defense.  The  position  taken  by 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor  was  of  a  sort  to  stall  what  to 
the  British  workers  seemed  the  best  chance  for  getting  the  contrary 
message  through.  They  might  well  have  quoted  a  passage  from 
President  Wilson's  address  at  the  Buffalo  convention: — "A  settle- 
ment is  never  impossible  when  both  sides  want  to  do  the  square  and 
right  thing."  They  wanted  to  do  the  square  and  right  thing.  But 
did  the  German  workers  know  this?  They  proposed  to  tell  them. 
Did  the  German  workers  want  to  do  the  square  and  right  thing? 
They  did  not  know.  And  they  proposed  to  find  out.  The  President 
was  talking  of  labor  conflicts,  but  it  was  after  all  their  experience 
in  labor  conflicts  which  they  were  applying  to  the  great  war.  "More- 
over," the  President  went  on, 

a  settlement  is  always  hard  to  avoid  when  the  parties  can  be  brought 
face  to  face.  I  can  differ  from  a  man  much  more  radically  when 
he  is  not  in  the  room  than  I  can  when  he  is  in  the  room,  because 
then  the  awkward  thing  is  he  can  come  back  at  me  and  answer  what 
I  say.  It  is  always  dangerovis  for  a  man  to  have  the  floor  entirely 
to  himself.  Therefore,  we  must  insist  in  every  instance  that  the 
parties  come  into  each  other's  presence  and  there  discuss  the  issues 
between  them  and  not  separately  in  places  which  have  no  communi- 
cation with  each  other. 

In  the  invitation  to  the  American  Federation  to  be  represented  ^ 

*  The  American  Socialist  Party  was  specifically  excluded  from  this 
invitation,  to  meet  the  position  taken  by  the  A.  F.  of  L. 


AMERICAN  LABOR  OUT  OF  IT  241 

at  the  Inter- Allied  Conference  in  London  on  February  20,  19 18, 
which  Henderson  mailed  on  January  16,  he  made  it  clear  that  not 
only  would  the  British  labor  war  aims  be  up  for  consideration  to- 
gether with  any  amendments  sent  in  on  behalf  of  other  Allied  par- 
ticipants, but  also  the  "very  important  question  as  to  whether  the 
time  has  arrived  when  we  should  hold  an  international  conference." 
"Even  if  your  federation,"  wrote  Henderson,  "does  not  quite  agree 
with  the  two  committees  responsible  for  organizing  the  Inter-Allied 
Conference,  it  would  be  desirable  that  your  representatives,  and 
especially  yourself,  were  present  to  put  the  American  point  of  view." 
The  question  was  still  open.  The  favorable  attitude  toward  it  of 
the  Allied  labor  and  socialist  bodies  had  been  made  clear,  however, 
by  the  fraternal  delegates  at  Nottingham. 

Gompers'  reply  was  not  cabled  until  February  18  (1918).  It 
follows: — 

Your  January  16  letter  reached  me  late  Saturday,  February  9, 
and  brought  to  attention  Executive  Council,  American  Federation  of 
Labor,  in  session  on  eleventh.  We  regret  that  circumstances  make 
impossible  to  be  represented  in  the  Inter-Allied  Conference,  London, 
February  20. 

Executive  Council  in  declaration  unanimously  declared,  "We  can 
not  meet  the  representatives  of  those  who  are  aligned  against  us 
in  this  world  war  for  freedom  but  we  hope  they  will  sweep  away  the 
barriers  which  they  have  raised  between  us." 

All  should  be  advised  that  any  one  presuming  to  represent  labor 
of  America  in  your  conference  is  simply  self-constituted  and  unrep- 
resentative. 

We  hope  shortly  to  send  delegations  of  representative  workers 
American  labor  movement  to  England  and  France. 

Nothing  could  have  better  illustrated  the  baffling  difficulties  in 
the  way  of  long  distance  communication  between  labor  bodies  in 
war  time,  than  this  very  exchange  between  British  and  American 
groups. 

Gompers  has  stoutly  denied  that  the  A,  F.  of  L.  ever  refused  to 
take  part  in  this  London  meeting.  There  is  no  reason  to  question 
his  statement,  although  at  Nottingham  in  mid- January  it  was  cur- 
rent talk  that  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  would  not  take 
part.  He  has  as  stoutly  maintained  that  shortness  of  notice  alone 
prevented  its  doing  so.  A  phrase  in  the  first  paragraph  of  Hender- 
son's letter  of  January  16  to  the  effect  that  he  was  "sending  here- 
with particulars"  raises  the  presumption  of  an  earlier  message;  and 
a  report  of  the  British  Labour  Party,  published  the  June  following, 
stated  that  a  cable  was  actually  sent  on  January  10,  a  full  month 
prior  to  the  date  on  which  the  A.  F.  of  L,  took  action.    The  text  of 


242  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

this  cable  was  not  printed  in  the  Federationist.  Gompers  did  not 
specifically  state  that  the  written  invitation  was  the  first  word  to 
reach  him.  But  the  whole  moral  force  of  his  contention  that  the 
A.  F.  of  L.  was  not  represented  because  of  lack  of  time  rests  on  the 
implication  that  such  a  cable  was  never  received. 

The  wording  of  his  reply  of  February  i8  to  Henderson's  written 
invitation  (without  Henderson's  inquiry  at  hand  to  show  what  the 
quotation  from  the  Executive  Council  applied  to)  was  not  proof 
against  a  construction  which  might  create  misgivings  in  the  public 
mind  as  to  the  make-up  and  patriotism  of  the  Inter-Allied  Labour 
Conference.  But  somebody  did  not  leave  this  to  chance.  As  pub- 
lished in  the  British  press  the  day  the  conference  opened,  the  follow- 
ing sentence  was  apparently  part  of  Gompers'  message: — 

American  labor  believes  German  influences  inspired  the  London 
conference  and  until  this  is  disproved  will  avoid  the  conference. 

Nothing  could  have  been  better  timed  than  this  postponed  and 
altered  cablegram  to  discredit  the  whole  meeting  at  the  very  outset 
and  to  provoke  discord  among  its  members.  But  with  the  original 
reply  in  their  hands  the  publicity  committee  of  the  conference  gave 
the  text  out  as  received  by  them,  together  with  a  copy  of  the  follow- 
ing cable: — 

"Gompers, 
"American  Federation  of  Labor, 
"Washington. 
"Press  in  this  country  circulating  statement,  your  alleged  author- 
ity,   that    American    labor    believes    German    influences    inspire    the 
London  conference.     Nothing  of  this  appears  in  your  telegram  to 
us.     We  feel  sure  you  will  resent  gross  falsification  your  message. 
Apparently    part   of   campaign   malicious   misrepresentation   on   part 
enemies  of  labor.     Trust  you  will  dissociate  your  federation  from 
statement  which  is  wholly  untrue." 

The  Federationist  stated  (April)  that  the  A.  F.  of  L.  cablegram 
was  given  out  in  Washington  the  day  it  was  sent,  and  was  cabled 
abroad  by  "some  representative  of  the  press  in  New  York."  There 
is  nothing  to  indicate  that  the  A.  F.  of  L.  endeavored  to  probe  as 
to  which  side  of  the  water  the  sentence  was  interpolated  in  a  way 
which  practically  charged,  in  the  name  of  American  labor,  that  the 
conference  leaders  were  traitors  or  German  tools.  Gompers,  "owing 
to  important  official  engagements  which  necessitated  absence  from 
Washington  and  to  official  duties  that  could  not  be  deferred,"  al- 
lowed them  to  simmer  from  February  25  to  March  13  before  cabling 
a  disclaimer  of  the  sentence.     Even  then,  he  stopped  short  with 


AMERICAN  LABOR  OUT  OF  IT  243 

denying  responsibility  for  the  "garbled"  text.  While  he  took  pains 
to  reiterate  his  own  unblemished  position  against  meeting  enemy 
labor,  he  was  non-committal  as  to  the  libel  for  which  his  cable- 
gram had  served  as  a  carrier. 


CHAPTER  XX 

LABOR  IN  LEADING  STRINGS 

In  the  succeeding  months  every  effort  of  the  British  labor  major- 
ity to  send  spokesmen  to  America  to  overcome  isolation  and  dis- 
tance and  the  misapprehensions  bred  of  them,  was  successfully 
balked.  Meanwhile,  the  extreme  right  of  the  British  labor  move- 
ment was  not  so  circumscribed,  nor  was  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor. 

While  the  two  great  British  labor  bodies  were  drawing  Allied 
labor  into  mutual  conference  in  London  (February,  191 8,  the  gov- 
ernment labor  group  had  posted  off  to  the  United  States  a  delega- 
tion of  its  own  way  of  thinking.  Seven  days  before  the  Labour 
Party  executive  sent  its  cabled  invitation  to  America,  the  non-re- 
ceipt of  which  apparently  prevented  A.  F.  of  L.  participation  in  the 
London  conference,  Barnes  of  the  War  Cabinet  sent  this  cable: — 

"Gompers, 

"Afel,   Washington. 

"Letters  received.  Would  you  invite  small  delegation  of  labor 
men  from  here  to  come  over  and  tour  U.  S.  A.?  We  think  it  would 
be  useful.  I  could  send  you  about  three  of  our  best  men.  Best 
wishes.     Happy  New  Year." 

To  which  Gompers  replied,  stipulating  that  they  should  be  "true 
British  trade  unionists,"  and  suggesting  that  they  come  in  February 
(1918)  so  as  to  take  part  in  Labour's  Loyalty  Campaign. 

"Each  of  the  men  was  specially  fitted  to  interpret  British 
thought  and  purpose  in  regard  to  war  and  labor  matters,"  said  the 
American  Federationist  at  the  close  of  their  tour.  But,  however 
ably  and  conscientiously  they  may  have  spoken  for  their  unions 
or  their  government — or,  for  that  matter,  for  the  great  mass  of 
British  labor  so  far  as  the  prosecution  of  the  war  went, — they  were 
not  only  out  of  touch  with,  but  out  of  joint  with,  those  great  for- 
eign and  domestic  policies  which  now  fired  the  British  labor  move- 
ment; rather,  they  were  likely  to  short-circuit  any  understanding  of 
these  policies  on  this  side  of  the  water.  They  might  speak  for  the 
British  General  Federation  of  Trade  Unions  whose  president  (Ap- 
pleton)  was  one  of  the  delegates,  but  his  penchant  for  speaking  for 

244 


LABOR  IN  LEADING  STRINGS  245 

the  whole  labor  movement  (not  at  all  to  its  liking)  had  been  not 
the  least  of  the  causes  why  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the 
Trades  Union  Congress  and  the  Labour  Party  executive  had  dropped 
the  Federation  from  the  joint  board  in  191 7.  They  might  speak 
for  the  British  Workers'  League,  of  which  Victor  Fisher  was  the 
moving  spirit,  but  which  had  been  roundly  denounced  at  the  Not- 
tingham meeting  of  the  Labour  Party.  They  had  been  selected 
without  reference  to,  or  consultation  with,  the  two  great  labor 
bodies  which  together  embrace  over  four-fifths  of  the  organized 
workers  of  Great  Britain. 

The  publication  of  these  facts  while  the  delegates  were  on 
tour  let  the  cat  out  of  the  bag  and  brought  down  Gompers'  wrath 
at  a  meeting  on  March  6,  of  the  National  Civic  Federation  of  which 
he  is  vice-president.  This  body  dates  back  to  the  period  of  cor- 
porate expansion  when  industries  were  being  organized  on  a  na- 
tional scale,  and  its  initiation  by  Ralph  M.  Easley  represented  an 
effort  to  build  up  better  relations  among  the  national  organizations 
of  employers,  employees  and  the  public.  Compared  with  the  anti- 
union, public-be-damned  policy  of  the  National  Association  of 
Manufacturers,  it  registered  a  notable  advance  toward  understand- 
ing and  cooperation,  and  its  work  in  promoting  negotiation,  concilia- 
tion and  arbitration  is  a  progressive  chapter  in  American  industrial 
history.  For  many  years  this  was  carried  on  in  the  competent  hands 
of  JoAin  Mitchell,  until  the  United  Mine  Workers  of  America  de- 
manded his  withdrawal  on  the  grounds  of  other  of  the  Federation's 
activities.  For  the  activities  of  its  executive  staff  were  not  con- 
fined to  the  affirmative  policy  of  building  up  better  relations  between 
capital  and  labor  but  were  concerned  also  with  cementing  their 
partnership  in  the  existing  order  to  the  defeat  of  any  radical  efforts 
to  modify  it.  They  long  ago  supplied  lists  of  trade  union  and  other 
speakers  calculated  to  combat  the  propaganda  of  socialism.  With 
the  outbreak  of  the  great  war,  they  capitalized  to  the  full  the  oppor- 
tunity to  identify  socialism  as  the  sinister  offspring  of  Kaiserism. 
Their  habit  has  been,  also,  to  lump  with  socialism,  practical  steps 
in  the  direction  of  social  control,  a  habit  which,  linked,  perhaps,  with 
the  dual  elements  in  the  membership  of  the  Civic  Federation,  has 
resulted  in  an  oblique  opposition  to  reforms  in  the  industrial  field. 
The  National  Child  Labor  Committee  encountered  them  in  its  cam- 
paigns for  protective  legislation  against  Southern  cotton  mill  abuses, 
the  American  Association  for  Labor  Legislation  when  it  crossed 
swords  with  the  employers'  liability  insurance  companies  over  the 
creation  of  public  compensation  funds,  the  Russell  Sage  Founda- 
tion and  the  National  Consumers  League  in  their  efforts  to  improve 
department  store  conditions  and  the  New  York  State  Factory  Inves- 


246  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

tigation  Commission  in  its  findings  for  minimum  wage  legislation. 
At  the  present  time,  a  subsidiary  of  the  Federation  is  apparently 
engaged  in  a  propaganda  to  combat  compulsory  sickness  insurance 
as  a  German  invention.  The  British  Labour  Party's  reconstruction 
program  was  a  snort  in  the  nostrils  of  such  obstructionists,  and  its 
proposals  for  an  inter-belligerent  conference  while  the  war  was  on 
gave  them  fire  and  brimstone  to  breathe. 

In  advance  of  this  New  York  meeting  of  March  6,  Easley,  as  chair- 
man of  the  board  of  the  Civic  Federation,  sent  out  the  following 
letter: — 

There  has  been  observable  within  the  last  few  weeks  the  rapid 
development  of  a  serious  break,  in  this  country  as  well  as  in  Europe, 
between  a  combination  of  the  Pacifist,  Socialist,  Bolshevik  and  other 
pro-German  forces,  on  the  one  hand,  and,  on  the  other,  the  organ- 
ized labor  movement  (represented  in  this  country  by  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  and  the  Railway  Brotherhoods)  and  the  other 
elements  in  our  national  life  that  stand  for  continuing  the  war  until 
a  just  and  permanent  peace  can  be  secured. 

The  offensive  has  been  taken  by  the  Pacifists  and  Socialists  in 
Europe  and  they  are  now  arranging  to  send  to  this  country  a  dele- 
gation to  promote  a  program  which  practically  means  the  securing 
of  an  immediate  German  peace.  This  is  accomplished  by  the  calling 
of  an  international  labor  and  socialist  conference  at  Stockholm  or 
in  Switzerland,  where  an  overwhelming  majority  of  the  delegates, 
selected  on  the  Socialist  Party  and  Socialist  Union  membership 
basis,  would  be  Germans  or  pro-Germans,  thus  enabling  the  Ger- 
mans to  dominate  every  feature  of  the  program. 

As  a  part  of  the  program  of  the  Pacifist-Socialists,  who  have  ar- 
ranged to  send  a  delegation  here  to  initiate  the  propaganda  in  this 
country,  a  lure  is  held  out  to  labor  in  the  form  of  a  proposed  "after 
the  war  industrial  program,"  which,  when  stripped  of  all  unneces- 
sary verbiage,  means  nothing  more  nor  less  than  Karl  Marx  social- 
ism, which  has  been  repudiated  by  the  labor  organizations  of  the 
United  States.  As  a  prelude,  or  shall  we  say  "barrage,"  they  have 
already  inaugurated  from  England  an  attack  on  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  and  especially  on  Mr.  Gompers,  as  well  as  on 
British  labor  delegates  now  in  this  country  who  represent  the  trade 
union  movement  in  Great  Britain  in  the  same  manner  as  the  Amer- 
ican Federation  of  Labor  and  the  Railway  Brotherhoods  represent 
organized  labor  here,  the  trade  union  movement  being  the  only 
one  that  has  ever  accomplished  anything  in  the  interest  of  labor  in 
this  or  any  other  country.  These  assailed  British  delegates  are  the 
gentlemen  who  will  be  the  guests  of  the  National  Civic  Federation 
at  luncheon  on   Saturday. 

The  president  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.,  if  we  are  to  believe  an  inspired 
cable  to  the  London  Times,  "traveled  to  New  York  expressly  to  de- 


LABOR  IN  LEADING  STRINGS  247 

nounce  the  critics  of  his  labor  co-partners  from  Great  Britain." 
The  press  made  much  of  a  remark  attributed  to  him  that  "to  talk 
peace  now  was  to  play  the  German  game,"  but  he  avoided  any  direct 
references  to  the  British  labor  offensive.  The  following  speaker, 
with  whom  he  compared  notes,  practised  no  such  decorum. 

This  was  William  English  Walling,  ten  years  before  an  exponent 
of  syndicalism,  in  rebellion  against  the  existing  rigid  political  action- 
ist  regime  in  the  Socialist  Party,  a  proponent  of  direct  action  and 
the  I.  W.  W.  and  a  defender  of  working  class  morality  which  would 
treat  a  labor  contract  as  "a  scrap  of  paper."     He  quoted  reports 
of  the  speeches  at  Nottingham  in  a  way  to  identify  the  British- Allied 
movement  with  the  Bolsheviki  and  with  the  extreme  left  in  France 
and  Italy.    To  do  this  it  was  necessary  to  associate  the  responsible 
leadership  of  the  London  conference  with  either  insincerity  or  fee- 
bleness and  wholly  to  ignore  the  first  edge  of  the  British  labor  blade 
— unremitting  resistance  to  Prussian  militarism  in  the  field.     Hen- 
derson was  the  "political  boss"  of  the  "British  laborite  pacifists." 
Walling  read  into  his  "moral  ultimatum  to  the  governments  from  an 
organized  democracy,"  the  Zimmerwaldian  doctrine  of  an  immediate 
general  strike  to  end  the  war.     Vandervelde  had  been  anxious  to 
have  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  present  at  the  London  meet- 
ing, believing  that  it  would  sustain  him  in  his  position  that  prior 
to  sitting  in  conference  with  labor  bodies  from  the  Central  Empires, 
Allied  labor  should  demand  of  them  explicit  subscription  to  the  con- 
ditions of  a  democratic  peace,  and  guarantees  that  "in  their  turn 
they  are  also  resolved  to  proceed  not  to  words  but  to  acts  for  this 
democratic  peace  against  the  Kaiser,  and  not  for  the  Kaiser  against 
a  democratic  peace."     He  had  carried  the  conference  with  him  in 
this  conservative  course,  but  Walling  could  see  no  other  interpreta- 
tion to  his  words  than  that  "even  Vandervelde  is  ready  to  pledge  a 
revolution  in  France  and  England  to  accompany  a  revolution  in  Ger- 
many."    "Every  socialist  at  the  Allied  conference,"  said  Walling, 
"knew  that  the  only  possible  purpose  of  an  international  socialist 
meeting  v/ould  be  ...  to  compromise  with  the  Germans."    Vander- 
velde, that  March  morning  in  this  fourth  year  of  the  war,  to  which 
he  had   given   himself  unstintedly,  was  probably   in  some  bomb- 
wracked  town  in  the  little  strip  of  free  Belgium  which  stretched  from 
Nieuport  to  Ypres,  or  visiting  soldiers  in  the  swampy  Belgian  trench 
line  who,  to  keep  from  freezing,  had  had  to  keep  moving  during  the 
bitter  hours  of  the  night  in  their  unheated  barns.    Throughout  the 
v/inter,  he  had  contrived,  as  Minister  of  Intendance  and  with  the 
help  of  the  American  Red  Cross,  better  shelters,  rest  rooms,  kitchens 
and  the  like  to  help  make  them  fit  until  spring  laroke  and  with  it  the 
expected  German  drive.    Against  this  they  more  than  proved  their 


248  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

mettle  in  spite  of  canards  that  they  were  defeatists:  directed  not 
only  at  Belgian  labor  but  at  the  Belgian  troops.  This  was  the  type 
of  socialist  and  labor  leader  who,  from  three  thousand  miles  away, 
was  pictured  as  weakly  yielding  to  a  conference  project  which  would 
throw  the  war  at  expense  of  the  democratic  principles  the  Allied 
workers  had  unanimously  made  their  own  for  war  or  for  peace. 

It  was,  perhaps,  significant,  that  Crawford  Vaughan,  ex-premier 
of  South  Australia  and  a  colleague  of  Hughes',  was  also  present  at 
this  American  meeting. 

The  report  of  the  meeting,  as  published  in  the  New  York  press, 
and  as  cabled  to  London,  was  to  the  discredit  of  Henderson  and  his 
following  and  to  the  entire  rehabilitation  of  Appleton  and  the  rest 
of  the  government  labor  delegation  who  looked  on.  The  following 
from  the  London  Daily  News  (February  i6)  is  a  sufficient  com- 
mentary of  their  real  status  among  British  liberals  at  home: — 

We  have  been  anything  but  happy  in  our  choice  of  emissaries  to 
America  in  the  past  three  years.  At  the  present  time  there  is  a 
party  of  British  trade  unionists  in  America.  They  were  selected 
by  the  war  cabinet,  not  by  the  labor  movement  in  this  country,  and 
they  are  in  point  of  fact  utterly  unrepresentative  of  the  solid  mass 
of  British  labor  on  so  vital  a  question  as  the  holding  of  an  inter- 
national conference.  Mr.  Appleton's  attitude,  for  example,  is  dia- 
metrically opposed  to  the  decision  of  the  four  million  members  rep- 
resented by  the  Trades  Union  Congress.  It  is  well  that  that  should 
be  recognized  in  America,  for  we  cannot  allow  differences  of  pur- 
pose to  be  assumed  where,  in  fact,  they  do  not  exist.  And  if  there 
is  one  prediction  that  can  be  made  with  more  confidence  than  an- 
other of  the  trend  of  the  growing  volume  of  democratic  thought  in 
England,  it  is  that  it  will  flow  with  ever  increasing  momentum  down 
the  channels  cut  by  the  authorized  exponents  of  the  policy  of  Amer- 
ica. Mr.  Wilson's  League  of  Nations  is  the  beacon  hope  of  the 
democracy  of  Great  Britain.  His  resolve  that  the  war  shall  remain 
a  war  of  liberation  and  not  of  aggrandizement  is  their  resolve. 
They,  like  him,  demand  that  the  military  weapon  shall,  continu- 
ously, be  reinforced  by  the  political.  So  far  as  their  spokesmen  con- 
vey any  other  impression,  they  convey  a  false  impression. 

On  their  return  to  England,  the  British  delegation  was  enter- 
tained at  dinner  (May  30)  by  the  Industrial  League,  organized 
along  the  lines  of  the  National  Civic  Federation,  at  which  G.  H. 
Roberts,  M.P.,  Minister  of  Labour,  received  "the  delegates  as  the 
most  trusted  in  the  (British  labor)  movement  and  the  most  devoted 
to  its  aims";  and  announced  that  the 

future  of  the  labor   movement  abided   with   the   people  who   were 
represented  there  that  night.     The  past  was  dead.     The  old  cries, 


LABOR  IN  LEADING  STRINGS  249 

the  old  shibboleths,  had  gone  never  more  to  be  resuscitated.  They 
could  not  allow  mere  sentimentalism  to  guide  them.  His  purpose 
was  work  and  wages  for  his  own  people.  First  of  all,  he  was 
going  to  be  concerned  with  the  prosperity  of  his  own  country.  It 
was  too  late  to  discriminate  between  one  class  and  another  in  Ger- 
many. 

In  response,  Charles  Duncan,  one  of  the  delegates,  said: — 

Of  all  the  men  he  had  met  in  the  trade-union  movement  he  placed 
Samuel  Gompers  at  the  top — a  long  way  ahead  of  the  rest.  He 
agreed  with  the  attitude  and  policy  displayed  by  the  American  Fed- 
eration of  Labor  in  regard  to  the  socialist  movement  in  the  United 
States.  The  downfall  of  the  labor  movement  in  this  country  would 
be  its  association  with  the  socialist  movement. 

Appleton  claimed  that  the  delegation  to  America  had  represented 
"993^  per  cent  of  the  people  of  this  country,"  and  in  an  interview 
railed  at  the  "so-called  intellectuals  claiming  to  be  labor,"  who 
build- 
airy  structures  of  rhetorical  formulae  which  look  very  impressive 
if  you  don't  examine  them  too  closely  and  if  you  can  forget,  as 
Clemenceau  says,  that  "the  Germans  are  at  Noyon."  Whether  they 
like  it  or  not,  they  are  playing  the  German  game.  .  .  . 

THE  AMERICAN  LECTURE  TRIP 

This  interview  was  later  circulated  as  a  press  sheet  in  the  United 
States  by  the  American  Alliance  of  Labor  and  Democracy,  of  which 
Gompers  is  president,  and  which  in  March  announced  the  personnel 
of  a  labor  delegation  to  visit  England  as  representative  of  the  Amer- 
ican Federation  of  Labor.  Chester  Wright,  formerly  editor  of  the 
Socialist  Call,  who  went  as  secretary,  was  quoted  in  the  "formal 
announcement"  published  in  the  New  York  Tribune  (March  29), 
as  follows: — 

The  delegation  will  deal  with  the  General  Federation  of  Trade 
Unions  as  the  representative  labor  body  of  Great  Britain.  It  will 
not  mix  in  the  politics  or  other  internal  affairs  of  either  England 
or  France.  It  has  under  its  credentials  the  right  to  confer  with 
labor  representatives  of  the  Allied  countries,  but  it  will  have  noth- 
ing to  do  with  the  representatives  of  enemy  countries. 

On  the  matter  of  dealing  with  representatives  of  the  enemy,  it 
will  stand  on  the  specific  declaration  of  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor  against  dealing  or  truckling  with  representatives  of  the  enemy 
while  the  war  is  on. 

Generally  it  will  investigate  conditions  and  report  to  the  con- 
vention of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  at  its  annual  conven- 
tion in  St.  Paul  on  June  10,  1918. 


250  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

Their  visit  was  something  very  different  from  a  free  interplay 
between  organized  labor  here  and  abroad  (which  was  clearly 
desirable  and  consonant  with  our  ideas  of  open  democracy),  or  even 
with  a  friendly  visit  on  its  own  by  an  American  labor  mission  (which 
was  clearly  the  impression  created  by  the  announcements  in  the 
United  States).  They  were  "bona  fide"  trade  unionists  selected 
and  accredited  as  an  official  delegation  by  the  American  Federation. 
They  went,  however,  if  we  are  to  believe  Wright,  to  deal  with  a 
minor  labor  faction  reflecting  the  views  of  the  government  labor 
group  of  the  extreme  right,  and  to  deal  with  it  mistakenly  "as  the 
representative  labor  body  of  Great  Britain."  And  they  went  at  the 
expense  of  the  propaganda  office  of  the  British  government,  at  a  time 
when  the  same  elements  in  the  government  were  successfully  stop- 
ping the  truly  representative  British  labor  bodies  from  sending  any 
spokesmen  whatever  to  America,  who  might  defend  them  from  out- 
rageous misrepresentation  or  lay  the  basis  for  a  better  understand- 
ing. For  not  only  was  the  delegation  held  up  which  was  appointed 
by  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  Conference  in  February  to  go  to  Amer- 
ica "to  confer  with  the  forces  of  democracy,"  but  also  the  fraternal 
delegates  appointed  by  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  to  attend 
the  A.  F.  of  L.  convention  in  June. 

This  is  not  the  place  to  follow  the  round  of  the  American  labor 
delegation  in  England  before  they  left  for  France — their  stay  at 
Warwick  Castle,  their  dinner  at  the  House  of  Commons,  their  ban- 
quet at  Whitehall,  their  reception  by  royalty,  their  visit  to  battle 
cruisers  in  the  Firth  of  Forth,  and  their  tours  through  industrial 
centers. 

In  their  conferences  with  the  British  labor  leaders  some  of 
them  showed  that  they  still  labored  under  the  illusion  that  the 
latter,  who  had  been  in  the  fight  for  four  years,  were  ready  to 
accept  peace  terms  dictated  by  Germany  and  needed  homilies  on 
patriotism  by  Americans  who  liad  been  in  scarcely  one;  that  Allied 
labor  was  still  talking  in  terms  of  the  old  SociaUst  International; 
and  that  the  British  wanted  to  enter  into  negotiations  of  a  binding 
character — get  up  from  the  table  with  a  signed  document  which 
they  might  hand  over  to  their  governments  with  a  "there  you  are 
— we  have  settled  it  for  you" — incidents,  all,  which  indicated  the 
sort  of  misrepresentations  on  which  they  had  been  fed  up.  Thomas 
said  to  them  bluntly  that  "whatever  they  might  have  been  told  on 
the  other  side,  and  notwithstanding  any  suggestion  they  might  have 
received  on  this  side,  they  must  realize  that  the  politically  and  indus- 
trially organized  workers  of  Great  Britain  spoke  through  two  na- 
tional committees  and  through  no  other  bodies." 

Perhaps  the  best  interpretation  of  the  A.  F.  of  L,  position  was  put 


LABOR  IN  LEADING  STRINGS  251 

by  James  Wilson  [chairman]  at  Whitehall,  when  he  said  (April  28, 
1918): 

The  American  labor  movement,  on  whose  behalf  my  colleagues 
and  myself  are  authorized  to  speak,  declares  most  emphatically  that 
it  will  not  agree  to  a  peace  conference  with  the  enemies  of  civiliza- 
tion, irrespective  of  what  cloak  they  wear,  until  Prussian  militarism 
has  withdrawn  within  its  own  boundaries ;  ^  and  then  not  until  they 
have,  through  proper  representations,  proved  to  our  satisfaction 
that  they  recognize  the  right  of  the  peoples  of  civilized  nations  to 
determine  for  themselves  what  shall  be  their  standard.  Unless  a 
reconstruction  soon  comes  from  the  German  workers  within  that 
country,  it  is  now  plain  that  an  opportunity  to  uproot  the  agencies 
of  force  will  only  come  when  democracy  has  defeated  autocracy  in 
the  military  field,  and  won  the  right  to  reconstruct  relations  between 
nations  and  men.  Spontaneous  uprisings  in  Germany  in  protest 
against  the  militarist  Government  have  shown  that  the  Gerfhan  gov- 
ernment is  still  stronger  than  the  movement  for  German  emancipa- 
tion. German  freedom  is  ultimately  the  problem  of  the  German 
people,  but  the  defeat  of  Prussian  autocracy  in  the  field  will  bring 
an  opportunity  for  German  liberty  at  home.  That  the  American 
government,  indeed  the  American  people,  are  of  this  opinion  is 
proved  by  the  preparations  they  are  making  to  coordinate  all  their 
means  with  the  Allied  nations  for  the  defeat  of  the  Central  Powers. 

There  again  was  the  old  crux  of  the  matter.  British  labor  was 
for  breasting  Prussian  autocracy  in  the  field;  but  they  saw  no  rea- 
son, while  doing  so,  to  throw  away  any  chance  to  loosen  any  forces 
for  democracy  behind  the  German  front  and  win  them  as  new  allies 
for  a  democratic  peace.  The  fact  that  Prussian  militarism  was 
still  stronger  than  the  movement  for  German  emancipation  was  a 
reason,  as  they  saw  it,  for  giving  help  to  the  emancipators;  not  for 
refusing  it.  In  the  joint  meetings  between  the  delegates  of  the 
A.  F.  of  L.,  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  Trades  Union 
Congress,  the  Executive  of  the  Labour  Party,  and  members  of  the 
Parliamentary  Party,  Henderson  said  that  their  desire  to  meet  the 
Americans  was  due  to  the  fact  that  owing  to  shortness  of  notice 
the  latter  had  been  unable  to  send  delegates  to  the  February  meet- 
ing. While  the  conference  regretted  their  absence,  it  had  felt  bound 
to  go  on  with  its  work  and  reached  two  fundamental  decisions:  (i) 
in  regard  to  an  agreement  on  war  aims,  and  (2)  as  to  the  method  of 
accomplishing  these  aims.  He  pointed  out  that,  with  respect  to  the 
first,  there  was  no  difference  in  principle  from  the  A.  F.  of  L.  war 

^  This  position  should  be  compared  with  that  taken  by  Appleton  of  the 
British  General  Federation  in  his  messages  to  Gompers  (pages  232,  237). 
The  A.  F.  of  F.  now  echoed  what  the  British  Federation  had  said  in 
turning  down  its  own  earlier  overtures. 


252  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

aims  formulated  in  the  statement  endorsed  by  the  Buffalo  Conven- 
tion of  191 7.  He  thought  it  would  be  a  great  step  forward  if  the 
delegates  could  recommend  that  the  two  were  so  much  in  harmony 
that  the  A.  F.  of  L.  should  publicly  associate  itself  with  the  inter- 
Allied  proposals. 

On  the  question  of  method,  the  memorandum  laid  down  two  pro- 
posals: (a)  of  a  concurrent  or  simultaneous  conference  of  workers' 
representatives  while  the  official  peace  congress  met,  (b)  of  a  pre- 
liminary or  intermediate  international  conference.  The  first  pro- 
posal came  originally  from  the  A.  F.  of  L.  On  that  there  was  agree- 
ment. The  issue  narrowed  down  to  the  question  of  a  preliminary 
conference.  While  objecting  to  anything  in  the  nature  of  a  binding 
conference,  he  hoped  the  Americans  would  not  object  to  conversa- 
tions with  the  German  representatives. 

The  Americans  took  to  heart  the  principle  of  a  consultative  con- 
ference to  the  extent  of  applying  it  to  these  meetings.  Their  pur- 
pose was  not  to  reach  agreement,  but  only  to  converse  and  under- 
stand each  other!  They  had  no  power  to  enter  into  negotiations  but 
only  to  report  back.  From  the  British  point  of  view,  the  most  hope- 
ful statement  made  was  tha^t  of  one  American  delegate  to  the 
effect  that  America  had  not  been  through  what  Britons  had  suffered 
and  had  not  as  yet  made  the  same  sacrifices.  If  reasons  were  ad- 
vanced, or  new  light  thrown  upon  the  situation,  if,  after  the  expe- 
rience of  some  eighteen  months  of  war,  some  other  position  should 
be  taken  up,  if  it  could  be  shown  that  as  far  as  labor  was  concerned 
some  way  of  bringing  down  the  military  machine  had  been  found, 
the  A.  F.  of  L.  would  not  be  found  wanting. 

For  the  most  part  the  visitors  had  a  penchant  for  opening  off 
with  speeches  declaring  America's  inflexible  determination  to  get 
on  with  the  war  to  "beat  the  Hun" — speeches  which  in  the  words  of 
one  British  committeeman,  "had  been  heard  a  thousand  times  on 
both  sides  of  the  Atlantic  and  no  question  of  policy  or  principle 
arose  from  them." 

While  this  was  true  in  the  conferences,  and  while  the  visitors 
lapsed  more  than  once  into  that  "weak  language"  of  the  American 
headline  writers  from  which  the  President  dissociated  himself  in 
his  Baltimore  address,  their  speeches  on  public  occasions,  in  so  far 
as  they  were  affirmative  testimony  as  to  American  effort,  served  a 
very  real  purpose.  We  must  remember  that  this  was  in  April  and 
May,  with  the  German  offensive  at  its  height,  and  with  the  casualty 
lists  lengthening  and  lengthening  in  the  British  press.  And  it  was 
heartening  for  the  British  public  to  be  told  in  ringing  utterances, 
by  representatives  of  organized  labor  in  the  New  Yorld,  that  the 
plain  people  of  America  were  with  them  in  the  struggle,  that  while 


LABOR  IN  LEADING  STRINGS  253 

250,000  men  were  coming  overseas  a  month,  uncounted  others  were 
putting  their  backs  into  the  production  of  fuel  and  ships  and  muni- 
tions, that  all  America  was  in,  and  would  be  with  them  till  the 
Prussian  thrust  was  broken,  and  liberty  safe.  That,  in  common 
with  all  England,  the  British  workers  were  glad  to  hear,  and  could 
match  with  fresh  exertions  in  those  months  of  stress  from  Land's 
End  to  John  o'Groats;  but  they  matched  also  the  new  spirit  of 
democracy  in  which  the  American  President  had  broken  through  the 
encrusted  statecraft  of  the  Allied  powers — matched  it  with  their 
own  collective  effort  toward  the  same  end.  The  issue  of  the  new 
open  diplomacy  of  labor  still  stood,  and  on  that  they  were  baffled  by 
the  association  of  American  labor  with  the  very  forces  which  for 
three  years  of  war  had  clung  to  a  course  contrary  to  their  procedure, 
and  contrary  to  that  of  the  American  President.  The  American 
delegates,  for  example,  were  to  be  found  going  from  a  reception  at 
10  Downing  Street  to  the  House  of  Commons,  where  they  were 
guests  of  the  British  General  Federation  and  where  Barnes  of  the 
War  Cabinet,  Hodge  of  the  Ministry  of  Pensions,  Havelock  Wilson 
of  the  Sailors'  Union,  O'Grady  and  the  rest  of  the  government  labor 
group  of  the  extreme  right  were  much  in  evidence;  they  were  to  be 
found  speaking  at  mass  meetings  under  the  National  War  Aims  Com- 
mittee with  Appleton  presiding,  and  to  be  found  at  a  dinner  of  the 
Industrial  League  with  Roberts  in  the  chair.  They  iterated  and 
reiterated  their  position  "to  talk  no  peace  until  victory  had  been 
achieved,"  that  the  only  negotiations  they  could  have  with  the  Ger- 
mans were  the  negotiations  of  armed  men,  munitions  and  ships, 
and  that  they 

had  listened  to  reasons  why  conferences  of  an  inter-Allied  character 
were  asked  for,  and  the  members  of  the  Mission  were  returning  to 
America  more  determined  than  ever  that  the  course  that  had  been 
pursued  by  the  labor  movement  there  was  the  only  proper  course  to 
pursue  in  the  struggle  in  which  the  world  was  engaged. 

— all  of  which  was  of  a  sort  to  undermine  the  British  majority  lead- 
ers and  to  put  it  in  the  position  of  truckling  to  Germany.  In 
the  industrial  districts  the  visiting  delegates  did  not  confine  them- 
selves to  exhibiting  American  devotion,  but  contrived  a  "holier-than- 
thou"  attitude.  One  of  them  addressed  the  shop  stewards  as  fol- 
lows: 

We've  heard  a  lot  about  you  chaps,  and  we  know  of  some  of 
your  difficulties;  but  your  job  to-day  is  to  beat  the  Hun  first  and  to 
settle  your  working  differences  afterwards. 

And  another  American  delegate  addressed  a  group  of  Clyde 
workers,  saying: 


254  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

How,  in  the  name  of  God,  can  those  who  love  democracy  think 
of  conferring  with  Germans  who  have_  committed  such  horrible 
outrages  against  innocent  women  and  children? 

The  Christian  Commonwealth  is  an  organ  of  modern  radical 
nonconformity  in  Great  Britain.  It  was  instrumental  in  calling  the 
American  preacher,  Fort  Newton,  to  the  City  Temple  of  London. 
The  labor  comment  of  the  Christian  Commonwealth  is  considered 
well  informed  and  moderate.  A.  E.  Zimmern,  of  the  Workers'  Edu- 
cational Association,  recommends  it  as  perhaps  the  safest  guide  of 
any  in  England  to  the  main  body  of  labor  opinion. 

The  Christian  Commonwealth  said  of  the  American  labor  dele- 
gation after  the  gatherings  in  the  House  of  Commons: 

Good  fellowship  and  the  traditions  of  hospitality  did  not  prevent 
the  visitors  hearing,  apparently  for  the  first  time,  and  to  their  own 
manifest  surprise,  that  British  labor  has  had  a  longer  experience  of 
war  than  the  American  workers  and  is  in  a  position  to  give  rather 
than  to  take  lessons  from  American  labor  on  the  duties  of  the  work- 
ing-class movement  in  war  time.  ... 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  circumstances  attending  the  visit 
of  the  American  labor  delegates  gave  color  to  the  suspicion  that 
American  labor  had  conceived  a  totally  wrong  impression  of  the 
nature  of  the  democratic  peace  policy  to  which  it  was  invited  to 
lend  its  support.  The  allied  deputation  which  was  to  have  visited 
America  to  explain  this  policy  was  postponed  in  consequence  of  the 
announcement  that  a  delegation  had  been  appointed  by  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  to  discuss  the  situation  with  representatives  of 
labor  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic.  But  the  difficulties  encountered  by 
the  allied  deputation  in  arranging  to  go  to  America,  contrasted  with 
the  celerity  of  the  arrangements  made  to  facilitate  the  visit  of  the 
American  delegation,  traveling  under  government  auspices,  give  the 
latter  mission  an  equivocal  appearance.  There  seemed  to  be  more 
anxiety  to  enable  British  labor  to  hear  what  the  Am.ericans  had  to 
say  than  to  enable  American  labor  to  hear  what  the  allied  working- 
class  leaders  had  to  say  in  justification  of  the  policy  unanimously 
adopted  at  the  recent  joint  conference. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  present  American  delegation  has  no 
power  to  commit  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  to  any  new 
policy  on  war  aims,  it  is  not  surprising  if  the  visit  is  regarded  here 
as  delaying  the  policy  of  international  conciliation. 

British  labor  had  shown  its  readiness  to  meet  American  labor 
half  way.  Henderson  had  stated  that  the  next  move  was  "up  to" 
German  labor,  that  German  labor  must  show  it  was  trying  to  shake 
loose  from  the  military  power.    On  April  17  he  said: 

We  want  to  make  it  clear  that  the  grasping  policy  and  lust  for 
world  domination  of  their  government  are  the  greatest  obstacles  to 


LABOR  IN  LEADING  STRINGS  255 

world  peace;  but  as  we  refused  to  support  any  imperialistic  designs, 
so  must  they. 

On  April  26  he  said: 

The  working-class  parties  in  the  Allied  countries  believe,  in  the 
words  of  the  War  Aims  Memorandum,  that,  whoever  wins,  the  peo- 
ples will  have  lost  unless  an  international  system  is  established  which 
will  prevent  war. 

Earlier  in  this  chapter  we  endeavored  to  set  down  the  antithesis 
of  British  and  American  labor  procedure  in  relation  to  the  emanci- 
pation of  the  German  working  classes.  Here,  at  risk  of  once  more 
covering  ground  that  was  dealt  with  earlier  in  this  book,  let  us  set 
down  that  antithesis  in  relation  to  domestic  opinion. 

The  point  as  British  labor  saw  it  was  this:  The  Allies  must 
down  Prussian  militarism.  They  must  establish  a  democratic  peace. 
They  must  safeguard  that  peace  by  the  instrument  of  a  league  of 
nations.  The  only  way  to  effect  these  aims  was  to  hold  together  the 
moderate  and  liberal  elements  in  the  Alliance  and  to  keep  them  effi- 
cient in  war-making.  The  appeal  for  winning  the  war  to  these 
ends  must  be  to  the  liberal-minded  forces.  The  reactionaries  were 
too  few  and  divisive.  Thus,  right  in  the  crisis  of  the  western  offen- 
sive, the  Saturday  Review  was  whitewashing  Turkey  and  satirizing 
"stories"  of  Turkish  injustice  to  subject  races.  Some  were  seeking 
a  road  to  the  old-fashioned  sort  of  "peace"  which  would  bolster 
up  Turkey  in  the  balance  of  power.  Lord  Denbigh,  aided  in  the 
Tory  press,  was  mocking  the  idea  of  a  league  of  nations.  He  de- 
scribed the  efforts  in  its  behalf  of  such  men  as  Lord  Buckmaster  and 
Lord  Parmoor  as  revolting.  Another  section  of  the  Tory  press  had 
initiated  an  attack  on  the  Vatican.  Ireland  was  to  be  conscripted. 
These  were  a  few  instances  out  of  many  of  the  absence  of  cohesion 
among  the  reactionaries. 

Opposed  to  this  disruption,  these  scattered  and  antagonistic 
aims,  these  "infinitely  repellent  particles,"  held  together  by  the 
militancy  of  Lloyd  George,  was  the  democratic  war  policy  of  the 
British  labor  movement  and  British  liberals,  which  found  in  Presi- 
dent Wilson  their  greatest  interpreter.  To  maintain  the  clarity  and 
fighting  edge  of  that  war  policy,  the  British  labor  movement  and 
British  middle-class  liberals  needed  the  sympathy  and  cooperation 
of  American  public  opinion. 

A  distinguished  government  official,  who  had  recently  made  an 
investigation  of  British  conditions,  wrote  at  this  time  that  he  found 

a  lassitude  due  to  uneasiness  felt  as  to  the  future  by  the  privileged 
classes,  and  a  lassitude  among  the  lowest  classes.    There  is  no  clear 


2S6  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

general  realization  of  the  extent  and  danger  of  this  lassitude.  I 
found  among  the  captains  of  industry  a  childish  optimism  as  to  the 
future.  I  have  heard  all  sorts  of  opinions,  optimistic  in  oilficial 
circles,  far  less  so  from  certain  labor  leaders. 

The  controlling  majority  of  the  British  labor  movement  clearly 
realized  this  lassitude  and  was  fighting  against  it  by  striving  for  a 
united  industrial  population  back  of  the  democratic  goals  held  aloft 
in  its  war  aims  and  in  its  reconstruction  plan.  A  spiritual  unity  of 
command  back  of  the  line  was  as  much  needed  as  the  unity  of  mil- 
itary command  achieved  in  the  person  of  General  Foch.  Toward 
creating  and  sustaining  this  united  western  front  of  labor  the  Amer- 
ican visitation  of  April  and  May,  19 18,  was  a  hindrance  and  not  a 
help. 


CHAPTER  XXI 

THE   SO-CALLED   SPLIT 

In  the  chapter  "The  Right  Strikes  Back,"  the  separatist  move- 
ments at  both  extreme  wings  of  British  labor  were  brought 
out.  The  June  (191 8)  conference  witnessed  the  first  Labour  Party 
election  under  the  new  constitution.  The  executive  was  to  be  com- 
posed of  twenty-two  persons,  of  whom  thirteen  were  to  be  represen- 
tative of  the  trade  unions  and  other  affiliated  organizations,  five  of 
local  organizations,  four  women,  all  to  be  elected  by  the  conference 
as  a  whole.  Less  than  four  per  cent  of  that  whole  were  sociaHst  party 
members.  The  election  was  absolutely  in  the  hands  of  the  union 
vote.  Yet,  although  the  I.  L.  P.  had  lost  its  right  to  separate  repre- 
sentation, two  of  the  members  actually  elected  to  the  Labour  Party 
executive  were  also  members  of  the  I.  L.  P.  executive,  one  was  an 
ex-member,  one  of  the  four  women  members  was  Mrs.  Philip  Snow- 
den,  and  Ramsay  MacDonald  was  reelected  treasurer.  This  made 
up  a  third  of  the  executive,  and  with  two  or  three  other  members 
holding  much  the  same  views  the  decisive  swing  toward  the  left 
was  now  registered  by  nearly  one-half  the  executive. 

Thus,  the  voting  indicated  that  the  policies  held  by  the  Inde- 
pendent Labour  Party  alone  in  the  earlier  years  of  the  war  had 
become  the  political  expression  of  an  increasing  number  of  trade 
unionists.  This  represented  a  reaction  against  the  knock-out  policy 
as  that  was  interpreted  by  its  British  spokesman,  at  a  time  when  the 
mailed  fist  policy  of  the  German  General  Staff  was  at  its  climax. 
The  controlling  trade  union  membership  believed  in  the  govern- 
ment's use  of  the  military  weapon  and,  therefore,  continued  the 
labor  members  in  it.  They  distrusted  the  government's  use  of  the 
diplomatic  weapon  and,  therefore,  set  out  to  take  over  into  their  own 
hands  the  potentialities  of  working-class  negotiations.  They  had 
adopted  the  ideology  offered  by  their  recognized  radicals,  brought 
them  into  their  councils,  but  proposed  to  keep  the  execution  of 
their  alternative  procedure  in  those  same  hands,  rather  than  in  those 
of  any  less  inclusive  body. 

Meanwhile,  with  a  general  election  in  the  offing,  the  extreme 
right  had  not  been  idle. 

In  May,  J.  A.  Seddon  and  Victor  Fisher  of  the  British  Workers 

257 


258  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

League,  which  attacked  the  Labour  Party  hip  and  thigh  on  war 
and  domestic  issues,  and  had  put  candidates  in  the  field  against  it, 
gave  out  that  it  had 

during  the  last  i8  months,  organized  thousands  of  meetings  among 
the  working-classes  throughout  the  country,  at  which  the  war  aims 
of  the  country  have  been  explained,  and  the  iniquities  of  the  enemy 
exposed.  Hundreds  of  meetings,  at  which  our  speakers  are  enthusi- 
astically applauded,  are  still  being  held  every  week.  In  addition  to 
this,  pamphlets  and  leaflets,  exposing  the  devices  of  the  pacifists, 
and  explaining  the  objects  of  the  war,  and  the  scheme  of  national 
reconstruction  put  forward  by  our  league  for  adoption  after  the 
war,  are  distributed  by  tens  of  thousands. 

Early  in  the  spring,  J.  B.  Williams,  head  of  the  Amalgamated 
Musicians'  Union  (whose  membership  is  10,000),  began  issuing 
circulars  advocating  a  Trade  Union  Party,  to  be  run  under  the 
authority  of  the  Trades  Union  Congress.  One  of  the  circulars  was 
signed  by  tv/enty  trade  union  officials  and  members,  two  of  whom 
were  members  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  Trades  Union 
Congress.  At  a  joint  meeting  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  and 
the  Executive  Committee  of  the  British  Labour  Party,  the  following 
resolution  was  adopted  by  a  vote  of  thirteen  to  four: 

That  this  Joint  Meeting  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  and 
Labour  Party  Executive,  having  considered  the  circular  issued  by 
J.  B.  Williams  and  signed  by  certain  trade  union  officials,  wherein 
an  appeal  is  made  for  the  formation  of  a  Trade  Union  Labour  Party 
which,  in  our  opinion,  is  calculated  to  disrupt  a  movement  built  up 
by  years  of  sacrifice,  calls  upon  those  responsible  to  immediately 
discontinue  such  action,  and  trusts  no  further  steps  will  be  necessary 
to  enforce  what  loyalty  our  movement  has  a  right  to  expect  from 
those  holding  such  responsible  positions.  .  .  . 

The  Executive  Committee  holds  very  strongly  that  no  worse 
service  could  be  rendered  to  the  movement  under  present  circum- 
stances than  that  any  attempt  should  be  made  to  disrupt  either  the 
political  or  industrial  forces  of  labor.  .  .  . 

Henderson  warned  the  Labour  Party  at  its  June  conference  that 
"it  was  up  against  a  very  sinister  attempt  to  paralyze  the  whole 
labor  movement  by  division,  coming  from  those  who  had  done  noth- 
ing to  build  up  its  strength."  Immediately  thereafter,  W.  J.  Davis 
(Amalgamated  Brass  Workers),  J.  B.  Williams  and  Havelock  Wil- 
son got  up  a  meeting  at  Caxton  Hall,  Westminster,  to  "repudiate" 
the  breaking  of  the  party  truce  by  the  Labour  Party,  to  promote 
the  rival  trade  union  body,  and  to  advance  the  cause  of  the  five 


THE  SO-CALLED  SPLIT  259 

year  boycott  agitated  by  the  sailors.  This  they  proceeded  to  do.^ 
The  Caxton  Hall  meeting  was  reported  to  have  been  attended  by 
four  hundred  individuals.  It  was  not  a  delegate  conference  which 
delegates,  authorized  by  the  vote  of  their  unions,  had  been  sent. 
Davis,  who  presided,  said  the  meeting  was  to  "oppose  the  tac- 
tics of  a  despicable  section  of  the  Labour  Party  who  represented 
pacifist  opinions,"  and  Williams,  who  acted  as  secretary,  that  "they 
did  not  want  a  peace  such  as  the  Bolshevists  had  obtained."  "Be- 
hind the  intention  to  force  a  crisis"  in  the  government,  he  saw  the 
"sinister  figure  of  Lord  Lansdowne."  Clearly  they  were  striking 
at  the  Labour  Party  in  terms  of  the  I.  L.  P.  Havelock  Wilson 
assured  them  that  there  would  be  no  sudden  appearance  of  Kerensky 
with  kisses  for  the  chairman,  but  said  that  he  had  intended  to  intro- 
duce some  representatives  of  a  Russian  committee  which  included 
a  Cossack  general,  members  of  the  Duma,  and  other  representative 
bodies  in  Russia.  They  wanted  an  endorsement  of  the  trade  union 
movement  in  this  country  to  assist  the  establishment  of  good  gov- 
ernment in  Russia.  The  committee,  he  said,  were  of  one  opinion,  that 
"Kerensky  is  a  gas  bag  of  the  most  dangerous  type,  and  was  respon- 
sible for  the  state  of  affairs  in  Russia."  The  incident  is  of  signifi- 
cance only  as  throwing  a  sidelight  on  the  international  affiliations  of 
some  of  the  promoters  of  the  meeting.  They  were  for  military  inter- 
vention in  Russia,  for  counter-revolution,  and  apparently  were  not 
unfriendly  to  the  restoration  of  the  Romanoffs.  Wilson  went  into 
greater  details  about  this  Russian  committee  in  the  Morning  Post, 
a  reactionary  paper: 

They  [the  committee]  simply  ask  that  the  Russian  people  be 
allowed  to  work  out  their  own  salvation,  and  they  request  that  the 

*  The  resolutions  adopted,  which  were  circulated  among  trade  union- 
ists in  advance,  follow : 

"(i)  This  Congress  declares  in  favor  of  a  distinct  political  Labour 
Party  for  the  trade  union  movement,  based  on  the  representation  of  and 
controlled  by  congress,  and  instructs  the  Parliamentary  Committee  to  take 
the  steps  necessary  to  establish  a  Trade  Union  Labour  Party. 

"(2)  That  this  Congress  records  its  condemnation  of  the  brutal  mur- 
ders and  robbery  of  British  and  neutral  seamen  on  the  high  seas  by  the 
commanders  and  crews  of  German  U-bcats.  We  further  regret  that  such 
piracy  has  been  justified  by  prominent  leading  trade  unionists  in  Germany, 
members  of  the  Central  Council  of  the  International  Transport  Workers' 
Federation,  L.  Brunner,  J.  Doring,  Paul  Muller,  and  Oswald  Schumann. 
This  meeting  is,  therefore,  of  opinion  that  there  can  be  no  peace  by  nego- 
tiation with  a  nation  which  attempts  to  justify  such  abominable  crimes 
as  those  committed  on  the  high  seas.  It,  therefore,  resolves  tl^at  for  a 
period  of  five  years  there  shall  be  no  intercourse  with  the  German  nation 
unless  the  people  take  full  Parliamentary  control  over  their  Kaiser  and 
Government  and  make  full  reparation  for  the  crimes  committed." 


26o  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

Allied  governments  will  give  them  a  force  of  about  30,000  allied 
troops,  representative  of  all  nations  on  the  Allies'  side,  to  start  from 
Vladivostok  and  help  the  Russian  Cossacks  and  others  to  link  up 
and  formulate  some  government.  The  Siberians  favor  a  republican 
form  of  government,  others  down  South  are  in  favor  of  a  limited 
monarchy,  but  that  is  a  matter  they  assure  me  can  be  adjusted 
among  themselves. 

Here  was  the  famous  labor  split  which  misled  one  or  two  of  the 
delegation  from  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  into  thinking 
they  had  started  something  that  would  disrupt  the  British  Labour 
Party.  Williams,  Davis,  Wilson  and  their  unions  were  not  affiliated 
with  the  British  Labour  Party,  so  that  they  could  scarcely  qualify 
as  splitters  from  something  to  which  they  did  not  belong.  The 
new  party  was  the  creation  of  a  handful  of  men,  in  nearly  all  in- 
stances without  the  backing  of  their  trade  unions. 

The  Tory  Morning  Post  was  of  the  same  way  of  thinking  as 
the  American  labor  delegates  and  hailed  the  Caxton  Hall  outfit  as 
the  "genuine  trade  union  political  party."  Responsible  trade  union 
opinion  was  to  the  contrary.  Said  J.  W.  Ogden,  chairman  of  the 
Parliamentary  Committee: 

There  are  two  necessary  parts  to  the  labor  movement — the  indus- 
trial and  the  political.  You  will  have  the  whole-hearted  support  of 
the  Parliamentary  Committee  (the  executive  of  the  Trades  Union 
Congress)  in  deprecating  any  attempt  to  hurt  the  Labour  Party. 
We  back  Mr.  Henderson.  To  go  outside  of  the  party  is  not  the  way 
to  work  any  reform.  I  say  on  behalf  of  the  industrial  movement, 
anything  that  disrupts  the  political  movement  disrupts  the  industrial 
movement.  If  the  matter  of  the  new  trade  union  political  party 
comes  before  the  Trades  Union  Congress,  I  hope  it  will  meet  the 
same  unity  of  opposition  as  in  this  conference. 

The  Observer,  a  Sunday  newspaper  and  review  which  is  a  semi- 
official government  organ  in  that  its  editor  is  an  interpreter  of  the 
Lloyd  George  policy,  had  this  to  say: 

Mr.  Davis  and  his  friends  show  wisdom  in  adopting  a  trade  union 
basis  for  their  venture  and  not  merely  starting  a  rival  political  party 
of  the  ordinary  type,  as  the  British  Workers'  League  did  in  founding 
the  National  Democratic  and  Labour  Party.  Trade  union  feeling 
might  conceivably  be  exploited  and  a  fraction  of  the  union  member- 
ship be  detached  from  the  socialist  alliance.  But  the  attempt  is 
made  too  late.  The  issue  was  decided  when  the  new  constitution 
of  the  (real)  Labour  Party  was  under  discussion.  This  constitu- 
tion, retaining  as  it  does  the  block  vote  and  the  predominance  0/ 
the  unions,  gives  the  most  conservative  among  them  the  safeguardii 


THE  SO-CALLED  SPLIT  261 

they  need  against  pacifism,  revolution  and  all  the  other  bogies — 
and  they  know  it.  The  labor  movement  means  to  act  as  a  unit  for 
political  purposes;  the  Labour  Party  is  a  very  efificient  instrument 
for  this  intention.  The  right  wing  will  tolerate  any  slight  failure 
in  enthusiasm  for  the  party's  war  aims  on  the  part  of  the  left  wing, 
and  will  stay  within  the  party  itself  even  if  it  has  not  quite  digested 
The  New  Social  Order  for  which  the  left  wing  is  mainly  responsible. 

On  July  I,  the  Manchester  Guardian  said: 

Far  from  splitting,  the  Labour  Party  is  drawing  closer  together 
and  bringing  in  fresh  recruits  at  the  same  time  that  it  is  shifting 
politically  towards  the  position  of  its  left  wing. 


THE    SAILORS    AND    THEIR   BOYCOTT 

Some  of  the  attendants  at  the  Caxton  Hall  meeting  turned  up 
that  same  evening  at  a  meeting  of  the  Merchant  Seamen's  League, 
the  object  of  which,  according  to  the  indefatigable  Havelock  Wilson, 
was  "to  discover  the  true  voice  of  labor  regarding  the  war."  Here 
Commander  Sir  Edward  Nichol  presided  and  G.  H.  Roberts,  Min- 
ister of  Labour,  expressed  himself  as  ready  to  join  with  the  mer- 
chant seamen  and  other  sections  of  the  community  in  determining 
that  they  would  not  enter  into  trade  relationship  with  Germany  un- 
til she  had  "after  years  of  purging"  proved  her  right  to  be  admitted 
into  the  comity  of  civilized  nations.  The  guest  of  the  evening  was 
none  other  than  the  prime  minister  of  the  commonwealth  of  Aus- 
tralia.    Hughes  said,  among  other  things: 

I  am  glad  to  have  the  opportunity  to  pay  my  tribute  of  respect 
and  admiration  for  the  part  played  by  Mr.  Havelock  Wilson. 
(Cheers.)  He  has  shown  to  the  world  what  unionism,  rightly  di- 
rected, can  do.  He  has  shown  the  power  of  labor,  and  that  a  man 
may  be  a  keen  and  resolute  fighter  for  the  rights  of  labor  and  yet 
be  a  patriot.  Labor  has  great  opportunities  opened  to  it  by  the  war. 
It  has  great  responsibilities  thrown  upon  it.  It  might  take,  if  it 
liked,  the  path  that  has  been  blazed  for  it  by  the  Bolshevists,  it 
might  sink  into  some  bottomless  morass,  or  it  might  turn  resolutely 
and  tread  that  steep  and  difficult  path  that  patriotism  and  common 
sense  alike  dictate. 

By  the  end  of  August,  the  League  reported  that  it  had  distributed 
1,500,000  copies  of  its  manifesto  and  declaration  form  among  trade 
unionists  in  and  out  of  the  service.    Havelock  Wilson  gave  out: 

A  letter  from  a  brigade  major,  "written  by  direction  and  on 
behalf  of  Brigadier-General  A.  R,  Harman,  C.M.G.,  D.S.O.,"  asks 


262  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

that  1,000  copies  of  the  declaration  form  should  be  sent  for  distri- 
bution among  the  officers  and  men  of  the  brigade. 

"People  at  home,"  writes  another  soldier,  "have  no  idea  of  the 
feeling  overseas  among  the  men,  and  they  will  be  considerably  sur- 
prised when  they  come  home  and  express  their  opinions.  In  the 
meantime,  and  in  the  event  of  an  election,  there  must  be  no  doubt 
of  the  battle  cry.  The  lads  out  here  will  stick  it  all  right  if  you  only 
keep  on  backing  them  up  as  you  are  doing." 

A  captain  in  the  Royal  Army  Medical  Corps  says  he  is  in  favor 
of  the  boycott,  and  adds:  "Please  make  it  60  years."  A  soldier 
three  years  in  the  trenches  wants  "a  clean  sweep  of  our  Huns  who 
misrepresent  us  in  Parliament  and  out."  Another  demands  that 
labor  shall  "shift  the  Bolos  from  the  trade  union  ranks." 

Wilson  carried  his  campaign  personally  to  the  heart  of  Robert 
Smillie's  district  in  Scotland  and,  reporting  on  meetings  at  Larkhall 
and  Hamilton,  said: 

There  would  be  about  500  people  present — as  many  as  the  hall 
would  hold — and  the  audience  seemed  to  be  about  equally  divided. 
The  "Bolshies,"  however,  were  not  local  people ;  they  had  been 
beaten  up  from  the  whole  of  Scotland.  The  only  question  they  put 
was  "What  about  Stockholm  ?"  I  told  them  this  was  the  very  sub- 
ject on  which  I  had  intended  to  address  them.  We  seamen  gloried 
in  the  fact  that  we  prevented  the  peace  delegates  from  going  to 
Stockholm.  What  was  more,  so  long  as  the  war  continued,  whether 
the  Government  issued  passports  or  not,  the  seamen  would  absolutely 
decline  to  carry  these  people.  The  declaration  was  received  with 
shouts  of  "Shame !" 

The  declaration  of  the  Merchant  Seamen's  League  which  rela- 
tives and  friends  were  asked  to  send  to  men  on  active  service,  pro- 
nounced in  favor  of  the  formation  of  a  Trades  Union  Political  Party 
"free  from  Bolshevist  influence"  and  in  support  of  the  boycott.  Its 
purpose  was  to 

be  able  to  announce  at  the  Trades  Union  Congress  at  Derby,  on 
September  3,  the  actual  number  of  trades  unionists  who  are  utterly 
opposed  to  the  pacifist  proclivities  of  some  of  the  labor  leaders,  and 
thus  to  show  how  little  mere  block  votes  as  manipulated  by  such  men 
really  represent  the  true  voice  of  labor. 

In  an  interview  in  the  Times,  Wilson  said,  "I  am  convinced  that 
German  money  and  influence  are  behind  the  pacific  movement  in 
the  labor  world."  It  was  the  Merchant  Seamen's  League,  however, 
which  had  funds  sufficient  not  only  to  send  out  these  declarations 
by  the  million,  but  to  give  the  luncheon  at  Derby  in  honor  of 
Hughes  and  his  apostleship  of  an  economic  war  after  the  war — 


THE  SO-CALLED  SPLIT  263 

to  which  not  only  was  Gompers  invited,  but  "all  the  delegates  to  the 
conference." 

The  week  of  the  Derby  Congress  (September,  1918),  Havelock 
Wilson  reported  his  tally  of  declarations^  as  follows: 

Votes  of  members  of  the  fighting  forces  for  a  five  years' 

boycott  of  the  Germans  550,000 

Votes  of  members  of  trade  unions  in  the  fighting  forces  for 

a  purely  trade  union  political  party 152,000 

But  not  only  was  his  Caxton  Hall  resolution  for  a  five-year  boy- 
cott disposed  of  adversely,  but  the  Ships'  Stewards  and  Cooks  (re- 
bellion below  decks ! )  were  there  with  an  amendment  to  hamstring 
its  scheme  of  economic  exploitation  of  the  seamen's  wrongs  by  offer- 
ing (in  line  with  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  memorandum) 
an  alternative  punishment  to  fit  the  crime  of  the  U-boats.  They 
proposed  to  delete  the  last  paragraph  of  the  resolution  and  substitute 
the  following: 

This  Congress  therefore  resolves  that  in  case  of  an  Allied  victory 
no  peace  will  be  considered  adequate  unless  those  who  are  respon- 
sible for  the  putting  into  operation  of  the  submarine  warfare  (which 
has  resulted  in  the  murder  of  thousands  of  innocent  men,  women, 
and  children  by  the  sinking  of  non-combatant  and  hospital  ships) 
and  those  who  have  carried  out  these  instructions  shall  be  brought 
to  trial,  and  such  punishment  meted  out  to  them  as  they  deserve. 

More,  on  motion  of  the  London  compositors,^  the  Derby  congress 
reaffirmed  its  belief  in  free  trade.    Jack  Jones,  of  the  General  Work- 

*  "As  to  Mr.  Wilson  and  block  votes,  he  had  a  letter  which  stated  that 
at  Doncaster,  where  Mr.  Wilson's  representative  invited  signatures  to  his 
boycott  and  trade  union  party  proposals,  forty  children  signed  that  peti- 
tion in  half  an  hour,  and  another  signatory  was  a  youth  well  known  in 
the  town  as  an  idiot.  (Laughter.)" — J.  H.  Thomas,  at  Derby:  from  the 
London  Times. 

*  "T.  E.  Naylor  (London  Compositors)  moved  a  resolution  reaffirming 
the  opinion  of  last  year's  Congress,  that  the  economic  conditions  created 
by  the  war  have  in  no  way  altered  the  fundamental  truth  that  free  trade 
between  the  nations  is  the  broadest  and  surest  foundation  for  world  pros- 
perity and  international  peace  in  the  future,  and  that  any  departure  from 
the  principle  of  free  trade  in  this  country  would  be  detrimental  to  the 
interests  of  the  working  classes,  and  injurious  to  the  prosperity  of  the 
nation  as  a  whole.  The  War  Cabinet,  he  said,  had  come  to  a  decision  in 
favor  of  preference  within  the  Empire.  Labor  must  be  on  its  guard.  'We 
have  in  this  country,'  said  Mr.  Naylor,  'one  whom  I  might  describe  as  the 
high  priest  of  protection,  Mr.  W.  M.  Hughes.  He  is  the  guest  of  this 
country,  and  is  stumping  the  country  at  our  expense  in  support  of  tariflfs 
and  protection  within  the  Empire.  I  am  anxious  that  this  Congress  should 
let  the  Government  know  that  we  are  in  earnest  in  maintaining  free  trade 
not  as  a  positive  policy,  but  as  a  barrage  against  the  raid  by  so-calle'^ 


264  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

ers,  provoked  a  laugh  by  saying  the  compositors'  resolution  was,  in 
the  circumstances,  like  a  piece  of  sticking  plaster  on  a  wooden  leg; 
it  would  mean  letting  in  the  products  of  prison  labor  of  Austria 
and  Germany  and  of  sweated  labor  the  world  over;  but  the  vote 
stood  2,711,000  to  591,000. 

The  "sailors'  "  propaganda  for  the  5  year  (later  7  year)  boycott 
on  German  goods  was  meant  to  alienate  trade  unionists  from  the 
war-aims  memorandum  with  its  strong  positions  in  favor  of  a  league 
of  nations  grounded  in  justice  and  economic  freedom,  and  against  any 
new  economic  war  after  the  war  or  any  throw-back  to  the  old  scheme 
of  competing  imperialisms.  It  was  an  effort  to  spike  the  policies  of 
the  British  Labour  Party  just  as  the  new  "trade  union"  party  was 
an  attempt  to  scuttle  the  organization  that  had  the  hardihood  to 
promote  those  policies.  But,  as  we  have  seen,  when  it  came  to  the 
composite  peace  resolution^  at  Derby  (Chapter  XVII),  Havelock 
Wilson  stood  practically  alone.  The  "new  majority"  had  all  but 
become  a  new  unanimity.  On  a  show  of  hands  not  ten  in  the  entire 
assembly  were  raised  against  the  resolution.  J.  H.  Thomas,  in  mov- 
ing it,  related  it  to  the  whole  British  labor  procedure  which  for  a 
full  year  had  been  under  bitter  assault. 

Thomas  held  both  edges  of  labor's  blade  to  the  light: 

Whatever  may  be  said  about  differences  on  the  war,  whatever 
fault  may  be  found  with  governments  or  statesmen,  there  is  no  fault 
to  be  found  with  the  courage  and  the  sacrifices  of  our  brave  boys. 
(Loud  cheers.)  But  when  it  appears  that  the  dark  clouds  are  shift- 
ing, when  it  appears  after  four  years  of  struggle  that  some  success 
at  last  is  attending  their  efforts,  do  not  let  us  make  the  mistake 
of  tempering  our  war  aims  merely  by  the  war  map.  It  is  useless  to 
be  told  by  our  press  that  Germany  alters  her  view  as  the  war  situa- 

tariff  reformers,  who  are  out  for  all  they  can  get  at  the  expense  of  the 
staple  industries  of  the  country.  Nothing  has  taken  place  since  the  war 
began  to  cause  us  to  change  our  opinion  on  this  question.'  (Cheers.)" — 
The  London  Times. 

*  The  resolution : 

"This  Congress  reaffirms  the  Blackpool  Congress  resolution  and  calls 
for  the  war  aims  of  the  Labour  and  Socialist  parties  of  the  Central 
Powers  in  answer  to  the  war  aims  of  the  Inter-Allied  Conference  held 
in  London,  which  stands  for  the  destruction  of  every  arbitrary  power  any- 
where that  can  separately,  secretly,  and  of  its  single  choice  disturb  tlie 
peace  of  the  world,  or  if  it  cannot  be  presently  destroyed,  at  the  least  its 
reduction  to  virtual  impotence;  and  further  demands  that  when  peace  is 
being  discussed  adequate  labor  representation  be  afforded  at  the  peace 
conference. 

"The  Congress  urges  the  Government  to  establish  peace  negotiations 
immediately  the  enemy  either  voluntarily  or  by  compulsion  evacuates 
France  and  Belgium,  and  reaffirms  its  belief  in  the  principle  of  the  inter- 
national as  the  safest  guarantee  of  the  world's  peace." 


THE  SO-CALLED  SPLIT  265 

tion  changes.  If  it  is  wrong  for  Germany  to  do  that,  it  is  equally 
wrong  for  us.  If  we  are  fighting,  as  I  believe  the  soldiers  are,  for 
a  great,  high,  and  moral  principle  that  will  stamp  out  militarism, 
then  that  principle  must  be  fought  for  through  good  or  through  ill 
times.  Let  labor  boldly  and  definitely  lay  it  down  here  that,  if  suc- 
cess is  following  the  efforts  of  our  troops,  we  are  still  fighting  for 
an  ideal  which  will  not  be  changed  by  their  success :  and,  in  the  same 
way,  if  again  we  have  to  go  through  the  shadow  of  the  experiences 
of  three  and  four  years,  equally  will  we  say,  "Our  cause  is  right. 
Our  aims  are  good,"  and  principles  must  triumph  in  the  end. 

There  are  a  large  number  of  people  who  criticize  us  because 
we  believe  in  the  Internationale.  This  resolution  asks  you  to  reaffirm 
your  belief  in  it.  My  answer  to  those  who  discredit  the  Interna- 
tionale is  this:  The  Internationale  has  not  failed;  it  has  never  been 
properly  tried.  It  is  for  us  to  see,  when  the  war  is  over  and  peace 
again  reigns,  that  we,  the  working  classes  of  all  countries,  direct  our 
power  and  influence  at  all  times  to  make  it  impossible  for  a  few 
people  again  to  cause  such  hell  and  carnage  as  they  have  caused  dur- 
ing the  past  four  years.  Let  us  therefore  carry  this  resolution,  not 
only  unanimously,  but  with  enthusiasm.  Let  this  message  go  forth, 
not  only  to  our  soldiers  and  sailors  and  to  our  allies,  but  to  the 
enemy  as  well,  that  British  labor  would  not  sacrifice  one  life  to  add 
a  yard  to  the  territory  of  the  British  Empire.  (Cheers.)  Let  the 
message  go  forth  that  labor  would  not  spend  a  penny  to  add  to  the 
power  of  Kings  and  Emperors.  (Cheers.)  But  we  as  a  movement, 
with  all  the  experience  of  four  years  of  war,  are  concerned  to  fight 
on  and  on  until  the  cause  of  ^11  wars,  which  is  militarism,  is  re- 
moved.    (Cheers.) 

Let  us,  in  this 'jubilee  year  of  our  Congress,  say:  "Not  only  is 
labor  united,  but  on  the  ashes  of  this  awful  hell  and  slaughter  we 
will  build  up  a  movement,  not  local,  not  national,  but  international, 
so  that  the  workers  of  the  world  will  know  that  the  brotherhood 
of  man  is  the  best  guarantee  for  peace."     (Loud  cheers.) 

On  his  return  to  America,  James  Wilson,  chairman  of  the  Amer- 
ican labor  delegation,  had  said — and  his  prophecy  was  duly  cabled 
to  the  London  Times: 

We  also  expect  that  when  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress 
meets  in  September  it  will  resolve  to  strike  out  the  resolution  adopted 
in  1917,  by  which  it  was  urged  that  conferences  should  be  held  with 
representatives  from  enemy  countries. 

He  had  also  expected  much,  it  will  be  recalled,  from  the  new 
trade  union  party.  So  had  a  company  of  American  pro-war  social- 
ists who  in  July  were  to  be  found  addressing  mass  meetings  in 
Trafalgar  Square  in  company  with  W.  A.  Appleton,  secretary  of 
the  General  Federation  of  Trade  Unions,  with  J.  B.  Williams,  secre- 


266  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

tary  of  the  Caxton  Hall  meeting  which  gave  birth  to  the  new  trade 
union  political  movement  that  was  to  disrupt  the  Labour  Party. 
They  were  members  of  the  Social  Democratic  League,  of  which 
William  English  Walling  is  secretary,  and  they  had  posted  off  to 
England  on  the  return  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  dele- 
gation. Their  coming  to  complete  the  job  which  the  trade  unionists 
had  begun  was  considered  so  important  that  all  question  of  pass- 
ports was  waived  by  a  disinterested  government! 

The  resolution  for  a  trade  union  party  came  before  the  Derby 
Congress  on  motion  of  the  Sailors'  and  Firemen's  Union,  the  dock 
laborers,  the  cardroom  operators  and  seven  other  unions,  whose  ag- 
gregate voting  power  was  243,350.  They  secured  adherents  that 
brought  their  total  to  567,000,  but  the  project,  as  moved  by  Have- 
lock  Wilson,  was  snowed  under  by  a  vote  of  3,815,000.  A  sugges- 
tion that  a  trade  union  federation  be  formed  inside  the  Labour  Party 
was  more  favorably  received  on  another  division,  but  was  nonethe- 
less voted  down  three  to  one. 

Americans  are  prone  to  forget  the  genius  of  compromise  in  the 
British.  They  march  up  to  a  crisis  and  then  settle  their  differences 
and  go  on  together.  In  these  war  years,  the  British  Labour  Party 
had  been  confronted  by  the  British  Workers'  League,  the  National 
Democratic  and  Labour  Party,  the  Trade  Union  Party,  and  to- 
morrow it  will  be  some  other.  A  few  halls  will  be  hired.  A  few 
elderly  Tories  will  attend  and  make  common  cause  with  a  knot  of 
Victorian  labor  leaders.  Then  still  another  new  political  party  will 
be  launched,  again  with  the  same  old  group  of  jolly  tars  on  the 
poop.  Again  Captain  Tupper  and  Havelock  Wilson  will  be  hailed 
by  the  Morning  Post  as  saviours  of  England.  Again  certain  noble 
lords  will  tell  us  that  the  great  heart  of  the  British  workingman  is 
in  the  right  place.  If,  then,  Northcliffe,  Hughes,  Bottomley  and 
Pemberton  Billing  will  lead  in  the  cheering,  the  ceremony  will 
be  complete.  But  Havelock  Wilson,  Seddon  and  Victor  Fisher 
(with  their  various  parties  and  more  to  come)  will  never  pry  Clynes, 
Ogden,  Thomas,  Purdy,  Smillie,  Robert  Williams  and  the  other 
masters  of  trade  unionism  loose  from  the  Labour  Party.  And  where 
coal  and  cotton,  transport  and  shipbuilding  are  found,  there  too  will 
be  found  the  rest  of  trade  unionism.  Neither  the  head  of  the  Musi- 
cians' Union  nor  Wilson  and  his  Cossacks  and  commanders  will 
make  any  permanent  dent  on  the  ranks  of  organized  labor. 

Now  the  part  which  American  labor  played  throughout  this  period 
cannot  be  so  lightly  dismissed.  Professing  to  be  at  odds  with  trade 
union  political  movement  at  home,  it  mixed  outrageously  in  British 
politics  and  it  mixed  on  the  side  against  its  professions — on  the  side 
which  was  at  odds  with  the  Wilson  policies  of  a  league  of  nations 


THE  SO-CALLED  SPLIT  267 

and  of  economic  freedom.  Moreover,  it  ran  the  risk  of  thwarting 
the  responsible  labor  leadership  of  the  new  majority,  and  of  throw- 
ing the  entire  British  movement  over  to  the  extreme  left. 

SNIPING  AT   HENDERSON 

Throughout  all  this  period  Henderson  stood  up  under  a  barrage 
from  batteries  trained  on  him  from  the  camps  not  alone  of  Hughes 
and  Havelock  Wilson  and  the  boycottists,  but  also  from  those  of 
the  extreme  left  of  the  British  socialists,  of  the  German  government 
socialists,  and  of  the  American  Alliance  for  Labor  and  Democracy 
of  which  Samuel  Gompers  is  president. 

Thus  Henderson's  central  policy  for  the  Labour  Party,  with  its 
new  constitution,  throwing  the  power  still  more  to  the  trade  unions, 
was  attacked  from  the  extreme  left  by  Bruce  Glazier  in  the  Labour 
Leader: 

The  growing  Prussianism  of  the  trade  union  official  mind  is 
seen  conspicuously  in  the  treatment  of  what  may  be  termed  the 
"smaller  nationalities"  within  the  affiliation.  The  sweeping  away 
of  the  federal  principle  under  which,  since  the  foundation  of  the' 
party,  the  socialist  section  has  been  entitled  to  separate  and  dis- 
tinctive representation  on  the  executive,  is  significant  of  the  reac- 
tionary trend.  Nowhere  outside  the  German  military  states  can  be 
found  a  system  of  bureaucracy,  of  complicated  and  undemocratic 
representation  of  power,  comparable  to  that  embodied  in  the  new 
constitution   of   the   British   Labour   Party. 

Another  portent  of  the  situation  is  the  duplication  of  official  trade 
union  influence  by  means  of  the  joint  board  consultations  and  agree- 
ments between  the  Trades  Union  Parliamentary  Committee  and  the 
Labour  Party  executive.  The  agreement  between  these  two  bodies 
to  exclude  socialist  delegates,  and  indeed  minority  delegations  of 
any  kind,  from  the  Stockholm  and  the  inter-Allied  conferences,  is 
a  sufficiently  clear  indication  of  the  drift  of  policy  in  higher  official 
trade  union  circles. 

It  is  true  that  Henderson  believed  that  the  Labour  Party  should 
be  predominantly  the  expression  of  the  trade  unionists  on  their 
political  side.  The  trade  unionists  did  not  reject  him  for  this  pol- 
icy. And,  socialistic  himself,  the  opposition  of  socialists  did  not 
swerve  him.    It  is  also  true  that  he  had  said: 

The  indispensable  necessity  for  a  league  of  nations  is  the  destruc- 
tion— the  complete  destruction — of  absolute  government,  with  its 
Kaisers  and  its  Tsars,  to  be  replaced  by  a  free  democracy. 

That  explains  why  he  was  hated  in  Germany  in  such  quarters 
as  were  indicated  by  the  London  Times  of  June  18: 


268  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

The  German  "radical"  press  is  busily  representing  Mr.  Arthur 
Henderson  as  an  incurable  chauvinist  and  fire-eater,  who  is  stub- 
bornly clinging  to  the  Memorandum  on  War  Aims  adopted  by  the 
inter-Allied  socialists.  The  Frankfurter  Zeitung  summarizes  in  this 
sense  Mr.  Henderson's  references  to  the  American  labor  delegation, 
and  says: 

The  war  aims  program  which  the  Labor  Party  issued  some  time 
ago,  and  which  doubtless  still  holds  good,  is  in  all  important  points 
identical  with  the  demands  of  Lloyd  George  and  of  the  other  Entente 
statesmen.  What  Henderson  demands  is  nothing  else  than  a  sub- 
jection of  Germany  to  these  demands.  It  needs  the  darkness  of 
ignorance  for  anybody  to  talk  in  such  a  fashion,  in  view  of  the  pres- 
ent situation,  of  the  possibility  of  a  peace  with  Germany.  The  oily 
and  swollen  phrases  of  Henderson,  who  talks  as  if  it  was  for  him 
to  grant  or  refuse  peace,  sound  like  a  challenge.  Probably  they  are 
not  intended  to  be  that,  but  they  are  in  comic  contrast  with  the 
events  on  the  world  stage,  and  still  more  with  the  insignificant  part 
which  Henderson  played  as  long  as  he  was  a  member  of  the  govern- 
ment. 

This  German  estimate  of  Henderson  could  only  be  compared 
with  the  estimate  of  him  by  an  American  radical.  Under  the  title 
"The  Kaiser's  Last  Hope — Arthur  Henderson  and  Philip  Scheide- 
mann,"  the  American  Alliance  for  Labor  and  Democracy  sent  out 
through  its  publicity  organization  an  article  by  William  English 
Walling,  the  opening  paragraph  of  which  follows: 

President  Wilson  has  divided  Germany's  tools  into  two  classes, 
agents  and  dupes.  Mr.  Gompers  has  expressed  the  same  thought  in 
referring  to  the  conscious  and  the  unconscious  tools  of  Germany. 
The  most  valuable  conscious  tool  of  the  Kaiser  at  the  present  mo- 
ment, far  more  valuable  than  Ludendorff,  is  Philip  Scheidemann, 
the  leader  of  Germany's  Majority  Socialists.  By  far  the  most  val- 
uable of  the  Kaiser's  unconscious  tools  or  dupes  is  Arthur  Hender- 
son, leader  of  the  British  pacifists,  and  formerly  the  leader  of  the 
British  labor  movement. 

And  again  in  July,  the  Alliance  sent  out  a  broad  sheet  from  the 
same  pen  under  the  title,  "The  Drive  for  a  Teutonic  Peace:  Arthur 
Henderson's  attempt  to  camouflage  the  Stockholm  peace  conspiracy," 
which  began: 

The  German  socialist  "international,"  together  with  its  branches 
in  Sweden,  Holland  and  America  and  other  countries,  has  decided 
to  hold  a  pseudo  "international"  conference  at  Berne,  Switzerland, 
probably  in  July,  in  order  to  bring  an  immediate  end  to  the  war — 
with  little  or  no  regard  to  the  fate  of  the  conquered  peoples  the 
Kaiser  now  has  in  his  power. 


THE  SO-CALLED  SPLIT  269 

The  pacifist  fanatics  of  England  and  the  defeatists  of  France, 
by  shrewd  manceuvering  have  secured  the  support  for  this  purpose  of 
all  the  socialist  parties  of  the  Entente  countries,  including  the  Brit- 
ish Labour  Party  and  the  French  Federation  of  Labor.  However, 
the  delegates  from  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  on  their  recent 
visit  to  Europe  put  the  advocates  of  this  scheme  on  the  defensive. 
Led  by  Arthur  Henderson,  the  defeatists  have  devised  an  elaborate 
scheme  of  camouflage  to  hide  the  real  purpose  of  the  conference. 

But  British  labor  knevir  its  man.  It  remembered  that  Hender- 
son's eldest  son  was  killed  fighting  at  the  front.  It  knew  that  his 
second  son  was  wounded  and  incapacitated  for  front  hne  service, 
but  that  he  reentered  service  and  was  in  charge  of  a  department  of 
supplies  with  the  army  in  France.  It  knew  that  his  youngest  son 
was  fighting. 

LABOR    IN    OPPOSITION 

The  counterpart  of  such  tactics  was  not,  however,  without  its 
effect  on  the  British  electorate  as  a  whole,  when  the  elections  were 
finally  set  between  armistice  and  peace.  The  coalition,  only  par- 
tially successful  in  maneuvering  an  uncontested  election,  closed 
its  campaign  in  violent  appeals  to  vengeance  and  self-interest.  Ger- 
many must  be  made  to  pay  the  whole  cost  of  the  war  even  if  the 
indemnity  exceeded  the  entire  national  wealth.  The  Labour  Party 
was  denounced  as  "tainted  by  pacifism,  internationalism  and  Bol- 
shevism." 

Before  picking  up  the  threads  of  labor  developments  in  the  inter- 
national field  throughout  the  fall  of  19 18,  that  will  carry  our  narra- 
tive to  the  close  of  the  war,  the  outcome  of  the  December  (1918) 
elections  can  be  summarized  here  briefly  in  relation  to  the  political 
and  industrial  currents  that  have  been  traced  in  recent  chapters. 

At  a  special  conference  in  mid-November,  the  British  Labour 
Party  (after  spirited  debate  in  which,  as  already  noted,  Clynes 
led  the  opposition,  and  then  resigned  from  the  ministry  and  threw 
in  his  lot  with  labor)  decided  to  break  with  the  coalition  and  face 
admitted  defeat  at  a  juncture  when  peace  was  not  yet  secure,  for 
the  sake  of  blazing  its  way  for  independence  on  its  own  platform  of 
a  democratic  peace  and  social  reconstruction. 

In  the  landslide  for  Lloyd  George  as  the  triumphant  war  leader, 
Henderson  no  less  than  Asquith  and  Dillon  went  down;  but  while 
the  Liberal  Party  was  crumpled  into  a  shell  of  its  old  self  and  the 
old  Asquithian  leaders  were  routed  en  masse,  labor  made  gains. 
Exaggerated  pre-election  claims  had  been  made  by  both  its  exuber- 
ant friends  and  its  shrewdest  enemies.    The  wave  of  nationalism, 


270  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

which  swept  England  because  of  the  military  victory,  submerged 
the  labor  internationalists  of  the  extreme  left,  including  Philip 
Snowden,  Ramsay  MacDonald,  William  C.  Anderson  and  F.  W. 
Jowett.  Barnes,  defeated  for  the  labor  nomination  in  his  own 
constituency,  Roberts,  Havelock  Wilson  and  others  of  the  govern- 
ment labor  following  of  the  extreme  right  were  swept  in  with  the 
tide.  The  British  Workers'  League  went  into  the  lists  in  a  new 
incarnation  as  the  National  Democratic  party  and  its  president 
won  over  Arthur  Henderson  in  a  three-cornered  fight  in  East  Ham. 
By  funds  subscribed  through  the  Morning  Post  and  other  organs 
of  privileged  groups,  it  financed  thirty  candidates  which  deprived 
the  Labour  Party  of  a  dozen  or  more  seats.  But  with  the  whole 
force  of  the  situation  in  their  favor,  and  the  whole  power  of  the 
coalition  behind  them,  they  did  not  split  the  Labour  Party  and  less 
than  ten  labor  men  hold  coalition  seats.  On  the  other  hand  the 
Labour  Party  itself  lifted  its  representation  from  thirty-five  to  fifty- 
nine  and  became  for  the  first  time  in  British  history  the  largest 
independent  group  in  Parliament  and  in  tha^t  sense  the  official 
party  of  the  opposition,  around  which  rally  all  the  revolts,  all  the 
newly  forming  forces  of  public  opinion. 

But  the  Parliamentary  showing  is  no  measure  of  the  Labour 
Party's  strength.  In  an  election  in  which  only  a  share  of  the  sol- 
diers were  able  to  exercise  the  franchise,  labor's  vote  was  within 
one  million  of  that  cast  for  the  Unionist  Party  which  numerically 
controls  the  coalition,  headed  by  the  radical  premier  it  had  fought 
in  pre-war  days.  The  400  coalition  seats  were  won  by  four  million 
votes.  The  Labour  Party  cast  nearly  two  and  one-half  million  in 
winning  its  fifty-nine  seats.  This  is  one  of  the  most  glaring  anom- 
alies ,in  the  British  system  of  redistributed  constituencies — that 
labor  should  hold  but  one-eighth  as  many  seats  as  the  coalition, 
when  it  polled  five-eighths  as  many  votes. 

Under  such  circumstances,  if  the  labor  movement  comes  to 
regard  its  political  power  thwarted  by  the  election  machinery,  and 
finds  its  hopes  for  a  reconstructed  England  balked  by  the  party 
in  power,  it  will  instinctively  turn  to  the  use  of  industrial  pressure 
by  strikes  and  the  threat  of  strikes.  It  has  a  century  of  experience 
in  the  use  of  the  industrial  weapon,  whereas  a  brief  term  of  eighteen 
years  is  its  experience  in  the  political  field. 

Significantly,  Robert  Smillie  was  at  this  same  juncture  reelected 
to  the  presidency  of  the  Miners'  Federation  by  a  three  to  one 
majority.  And  the  miners  insisted  that  hereafter  he  give  full-time 
service  in  a  paid  job,  instead,  as  formerly,  part-time  service  in  an 
honorary  capacity.  This  meant  that  Smillie  gave  up  his  plan  to 
"stand"  for  a  Parliamentary  seat  at  the  General  Election.     And 


THE  SO-CALLED  SPLIT  271 

it  meant  that  while  the  miners  have  the  largest  labor  group  at 
Westminster,  they  hold  in  reserve  their  industrial  organization  in 
asserting  their  demands  for  social  change.  By  mid-winter,  after 
general  strikes  in  Glasgow  and  Belfast  in  which  the  shop-stewards 
figured,  the  Triple  Alliance  was  to  make  united  demands  (includ- 
ing nationalization  of  the  mines)  and  the  government  was  to  coun- 
ter by  setting  up  a  new  inclusive  joint  body,  representing  all  the 
interests  in  British  industry. 

The  leaders  of  the  "Centre,"  like  John  Robert  Clynes,  of  equal 
strength  in  the  trade  union  movement  as  in  the  political  movement, 
are  desirous  that  the  new  power  of  labor  shall  exert  itself  through 
the  established  channels  of  government.  Clynes  said  at  the  close  of 
1918: 

So  far  as  I  have  any  authority  or  influence  with  regard  to  the 
working  people  of  this  country,  I  want  to  resent  in  the  strongest 
terms  the  declarations  now  being  made  to  invite  the  organized  work- 
ing classes  of  the  country  to  use  the  industrial  weapon,  the  weapon 
of  the  strike,  to  attain  their  political  ends. 

The  masses  of  wage  earners  form  the  greater  part  of  the  electorate, 
and  there  is  no  economic  alteration  which  organized  workers  desire, 
which  they  cannot  obtain  from  the  floor  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
if  they  send  their  representatives  there  in  large  enough  numbers. 
Labor  should  stand  for  law  and  order,  because  the  time  may  come 
when  labor  may  have  to  make  the  law,  when  labor  will  expect  and 
call  upon  other  sections  of  the  community  to  respect  the  law. 

If  labor  expects  that  example  to  be  followed,  it  miust  set  it  now. 

Which  course — constitutional,  political  and  economic  reform  or 
industrial  direct  action — will  prevail  in  the  counsels  of  labor  de- 
pends on  the  capacity  of  political  democracy  to  assert  itself  con- 
structively at  Westminster. 

Such  a  conservative  publicist  as  J.  L.  Garvin,  editor  of  The 
Observer,  in  a  pre-election  statement  advocating  the  return  of 
Lloyd  George,  wrote: 

Either  we  must  undertake  with  clear  eyes  and  firm  hands  a  con- 
structive revolution,  not  shrinking  in  the  process  from  a  large  ex- 
tension of  public  control,  or  the  general  order  here  will  be  menaced. 
After  the  Great  War  and  its  astounding  revelation  of  how  pigmy 
were  our  pre-war  efforts  for  the  improvement  of  human  life  and 
happiness  by  comparison  with  the  colossal  ability  and  power  since 
employed  in  a  necessary  destruction,  the  masses  everywhere  demand 
a  new  society.  After  the  most  frightful  of  wars,  changing  forever 
the  mind  and  aspirations  of  the  people,  we  have  to  transform — from 
top  to  bottom  and  throughout — the  whole  social  and  industrial  or- 
ganization of  Great  Britain.  Unless  we  do  that  a  tidal  wave  of  revo- 
lutionary feeling  will. sweep  the  polls  a  very  few  years  from  now. 


2  72  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

Henceforth  Labor  and  Capital  face  each  other  as  equal  in  human 
dignity  and  status.  Labor  is  done  for  ever  and  for  ever  with  the 
old  relationship  of  'master  and  man.'  The  workers  want  the  profit 
of  large  public  services  on  a  national  basis  to  go  to  public  uses  in- 
stead of  to  private  pockets.  After  the  Great  War  that  is  what  they 
want.  The  conservative  forces  everywhere  must  willingly  give  more 
than  they  have  given  or  seem  yet  prepared  to  give,  or  it  will  be  much 
the  worse  for  them.  In  this  country  they  must  face  the  extension  of 
public  control  in  five  or  six  large  spheres  of  public  life. 


CHAPTER  XXII 

IN  franklin's  footsteps 

In  the  course  of  his  address  at  the  Derby  meeting  of  the  British 
Trades  Union  Congress  (September,  1918),  Samuel  Gompers  swept 
away  part  of  his  notes  and  announced  that  he  was  "shortening  his 
line  on  the  international  front."  He  did  just  that.  Within  the 
month  he  sat  in  at  a  reconvened  session  in  London  of  the  Inter- 
Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference;  and  American  labor  struck 
hands  on  war  aims  with  the  Allied  socialist  and  labor  formation. 

"We  of  this  Labor  Mission,"  "Gompers  had  been  quoted  as 
saying  at  the  government  luncheon  tendered  him  on  his  arrival 
(with  Barnes  in  the  chair,  supported  by  three  of  his  colleagues  in 
the  War  Cabinet,  the  Prime  Minister,  Lord  Milner  and  Chamber- 
lain), "have  come  here  for  the  purpose  of  endeavoring  to  unite  the 
workers  of  Great  Britain,  of  France,  and  of  Italy  to  stand  together 
as  one  solid  phalanx  to  make  good  the  declaration  of  American 
labor."  Now,  unity  among  the  workers  of  Great  Britain  and 
France,  of  Italy  and  Belgium  had  been  achieved  seven  months  ear- 
lier, with  American  labor  "out  of  it"  in  the  interval.  And  the  new 
unity,  to  which  American  labor  became  party  in  the  remaining  two 
months  of  war,  was  not  achieved  by  swinging  them  to  the  American 
labor  position  on  the  one  question  of  procedure  upon  which  it  had 
kept  aloof,  but  by  recognizing  the  common  principles  which  had 
animated  labor's  war  aims  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic  and  upon 
which  Henderson  had  pleaded  in  vain  with  the  earlier  American 
labor  delegation  to  make  public  cause  with  them.  It  was  not  the 
one-ply  military  policy  of  the  president  of  the  American  Federation 
of  Labor,  but  the  dual  military-political  offensive  of  the  American 
President  upon  which  they  found  common  footing,  or,  to  be  specific, 
his  14  war-aims,  which  no  sooner  had  been  put  out  in  January, 
1918,  than  they  were  subscribed  to  as  kindred  to  their  own  in  a 
joint  statement  by  Henderson  for  the  British  Labour  Party  and 
Bowerman  for  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress. 

We  must  go  back  to  the  days  of  Benjamin  Franklin  for  a  figure 
comparable  to  that  of  Samuel  Gompers  on  his  wartime  mission  to 
England,  France  and  Italy.  To  help  American  readers  visualize 
European  labor  gatherings,  we  have  set  down  our  impressions  of 

273 


274  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

some  of  their  leaders,  men  and  women.  As  a  matter  of  comity, 
the  process  should  be  reversed.  Not  the  least  graphic  and  appre- 
ciative of  the  sketches  of  the  president  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  was  that 
published  by  U Opinion  on  the  occasion  of  his  visit  to  Paris: — 

A  stocky  little  man  of  whom  one  forgets  the  height  in  seeing 
only  the  strong  and  whimsical  face,  the  big  nose,  big  lips,  a  com- 
plexion colored  like  a  sun  brick,  a  scalp  almost  bare  with  some  few 
tufts  of  gray  hair  mixed  with  black  threads.  All  at  once  this  counte- 
nance appears  illuminated,  animated  as  it  is  incessantly  by  his  aston- 
ishing bright  eyes  in  which  sparkling  gold  and  green  appear.  These 
changing  eyes,  which  brighten  and  darken,  turn  themselves  directly 
to  you  m  inquiry  and  conquest.  The  first  impression  is  one  of  mobil- 
ity, of  force  and  almost  as  much  of  charm.  It  is  one  of  the  faces 
whose  modeling  and  expression  tempt  a  painter.  .  .  . 

Samuel  Gompers  is  not  merely  an  orator  with  a  magic  voice. 
From  the  first  meeting,  his  personality  strikes  you  and  impresses  itself 
on  you.  Still  less  can  we  define  it  in  a  formula  such  as  an  American 
proposed  to  me:  "He  reminds  me  absolutely  of  a  Scotch  Calvinist 
preacher." 

We  see  him  seated  in  an  armchair  with  a  big  cigar  in  his  hand 
patiently  lending  an  ear  to  the  questions  of  an  interviewer.  From 
politeness  he  has  put  a  French  rose  which  some  one  has  offered  him 
in  his  buttonhole.  He  listens — this  orator  is  a  singularly  good  lis- 
tener; he  makes  you  repeat,  put  your  question  more  precisely.  He 
is  in  no  hurry  to  reply;  prudence  is  his  first  virtue. 

However  sure  his  thought  may  be,  he  seeks  a  form  that  will 
express  it  better.  He  foresees  and  obviates  any  interpretation  which 
will  misrepresent  it.  He  proceeds  step  by  step.  With  a  definite 
character,  with  an  emphasis  of  the  voice  he  impresses  the  idea,  the 
fact  to  which  he  wishes  to  draw  attention.  His  hand  is  nervous, 
underscored  by  a  sober  gesture.  For  him  there  is  no  question  of 
leaving  to  the  many  chances  which  a  lack  of  precision  has  in  store 
for  those  who  leave  to  developments  the  trouble  of  working  out  their 
precise  thought.  This  prudence  is  a  sort  of  honesty,  a  feeling  of 
responsibility.  H  he  measures  his  words  it  is  because  he  knows 
that  every  word  is  an  act. 

Samuel  Gompers  has  both  the  inclination  and  the  gift  for  action 
and,  what  is  not  always  reconcilable,  he  is  a  strong  man :  "I  am 
proud  to  live  in  an  epoch  in  which  action  is  everything;  in  which 
there  is  not  a  thought,  a  passing  impulse  but  which  can  and  must  be 
translated  by  an  act."  And  he  adds:  "I  am  proud  to  live  in  an 
epoch  in  which  if  the  young  men  of  20  have  the  maturity  of  those  of 
30,  those  of  60  have  the  energy  of  those  of  40." 

Energy  and  vitality  which  abound  in  the  man  create  his  convic- 
tions. The  conception  which  Gompers  has  of  democracy  is  that  of 
an  extremely  mobile  society,  in  which  liberty  has  the  first  place,  in 
which  liberty  permits  every  personality  to  come  to  birth,  to  be 
formed,  to  assert  itself  frankly  in  complete  freedom  of  movements: 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  275 

"We  wish  to  be  masters  of  our  destinies  and  that  every  one  in  the 
universe  shall  have  the  possibility  of  living  his  whole  life.  We 
wish  to  have  the  right  to  make  mistakes,  to  commit  errors,  provided 
that  the  opportunity  is  given  us  to  express  ourselves.  This  is  the 
privilege  of  democracy." 

A  strong  personality,  he  feels  no  distrust  for  other  individuali- 
ties; on  the  contrary,  he  thinks  that  the  desires  of  the  masses  cannot 
express  themselves  through  persons  whose  action  is  embarrassed  by 
shibboleths  and  traditions  of  party,  and  that  their  interests  will  be 
better  defended  than  they  are  by  energetic  and  independent  men 
capable  of  listening  to  reason,  but  of  holding  their  ov/n  against 
caprice.  He  believes  that  the  great  force  operating  in  the  world  is 
that  of  bodies  of  free  men  animated  by  the  same  spirit,  closely  linked 
together  by  mutual  esteem  and  sympathtic  reciprocity.  In  accord- 
ance with  certain  essential  principles  of  action,  they  are  always 
ready  to  renew  their  agreement  by  amicable  discussions  and  to  recast 
every  day,  if  necessary,  their  action.  .  .  . 

Of  course,  not  President  Gompers  but  Colonel  House  would  come 
to  mind  in  pressing  deeper  the  analogy  to  America's  first  diplomat 
of  democracy.  The  visits  of  the  quiet-spoken  Texan  to  England 
and  the  Continent  earlier  in  the  war,  his  unpretentious  but  potent 
part  in  the  conferences  at  Versailles  which  promoted  Allied  unity  in 
military  command  and  economic  co-operation,  in  armistice  and  in 
peace,  afford  a  closer  parallel  to  the  mission  of  the  great  Penns}^- 
vanian  to  England  before  the  American  Revolution  and  to  France 
while  it  was  on.  None  the  less,  in  more  ways  than  one,  Gompers 
may  be  said  to  have  followed  in  Franklin's  footsteps:  his  rise  from 
a  cigarmakers'  apprentice  to  a  foremost  leader  of  men;  his  coming 
from  Britain  as  a  lad  to  make  his  way  in  the  New  World,  like  the 
coming  of  the  Boston  printer's  boy  to  Philadelphia;  and  his  pic- 
turesque claim,  in  his  advanced  years,  upon  the  retina  of  the  French 
capital.  But  it  is  his  part  in  inter-Allied  labor  activity  at  the  Lon- 
don  Conference  that  concerns  us  here. 

Gompers'  information  had  been  of  the  worst  from  the  start.  The 
correspondence  published  in  the  American  Fedcrationist  was  pep- 
pered with  the  names  of  Havelock  Wilson,  Appleton,  Victor  Fisher 
and  their  like.  The  hand-picked  British  labor  delegation  to  the 
United  States  in  the  early  months  of  19 18  was  of  a  sort  to  amplify, 
their  misrepresentations.  The  much  escorted  American  delegation 
which  visited  England  in  the  spring  was  confident  that  the  future 
of  the  British  labor  movement  lay  in  the  hands  of  that  same  crowd 
at  the  extreme  right.  With  the  exception  of  Clynes  (who  was  listed 
in  a  group  of  officials  at  a  dinner  at  the  House  of  Commons)  the 
American  delegation's  report  did  not  name  any  of  the  outstanding 
leaders  of  the  British  labor  majority.     Barnes,  Roberts,  Hodges, 


276  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

"Brother"  Appleton  had  place  in  their  report  along  with  Balfour, 
Beaverbrook,  Milner,  Churchill;  it  was  set  down  how  Queen  Mary 
"found  occasion  to  converse  with  each  member  of  the  mission"; 
how  Lord  Northcliffe  got  out  of  bed  to  "wish  them  a  Godspeed  on 
their  journey  home";  but  so  far  as  the  great  body  of  delegates  at- 
tending the  St.  Paul  convention  of  the  American  Federation  of  La- 
bor were  informed,  Thomas,  Smillie,  Henderson,  Bowerman,  Ogden, 
McGurk,  Purdy  and  other  chief  executives  of  British  labor  might 
well  have  been  bird  fanciers  or  collectors  of  postage  stamps. 

GOMPERS  ARRIVES 

It  was  Appleton  and  Havelock  Wilson  who  in  July  sent  a  mes- 
sage to  Gompers  to  the  effect  that  his  presence  in  Great  Britain 
would  help  the  trade  union  movement  and  the  Allied  cause.  And 
again,  we  find  Appleton,  Fisher,  Havelock  Wilson  and  company 
listed  in  the  august  welcoming  company  at  the  dinner  at  the  House 
of  Commons  on  August  30,  alongside  the  Lord  Mayor  of  London, 
Waldorf  Astor,  five  peers,  four  members  of  the  War  Cabinet,  and  no 
end  of  Sirs.    In  the  course  of  his  remarks,  the  Prime  Minister  said: — 

Mr.  Samuel  Gompers'  name  is  one  of  the  few  international  names 
— one  of  the  few  names  which  is  as  well  known  in  other  countries 
as  it  is  in  his  own.  If  I  may  say  so,  he  is  as  well  known  as  the 
Mississippi.  (Laughter  and  cheers.)  I  think  I  may  claim  him  to 
myself  as  a  kindred  spirit.  He  was  one  of  the  very  few  people 
who  approved  of  me  before  the  war  (laughter),  and  therefore  to 
me  his  presence  here  is  doubly  welcome.  He  and  I  have  very  largely 
the  same  ideals.  We  can  say  that  we  are  fighting  the  same  battle, 
and  he  and  I,  when  the  war  came,  in  a  true  Christian  spirit  have 
forgiven  the  people  who  were  suspicious  of  us  (laughter),  and  wq 
are  fully  prepared  to  cooperate  with  them  for  the  attainment  of 
ideals  that  we  have  always  fought  for.  Mr.  Gompers  has  devoted 
his  life  and  his  great  abilities  to  democratic  progress.  He  is  fighting 
the  same  battle  now  in  the  war  as  he  was  fighting  before.  (Cheers.) 
It  is  not  that  he  has  changed  his  mind.  It  is  not  that  he  has  changed 
his  direction.  It  is  not  that  he  has  altered  his  purpose.  It  is  not 
that  he  has  started  a  new  career.  He  is  pursuing  the  same  career 
now,  he  is  climbing  towards  the  same  ideals,  he  is  struggling  for 
the  same  aims  as  he  devoted  his  long  and  honorable  career  to  before 
the  war.     (Cheers.) 

G.  H.  Roberts,  Minister  of  Labour,  followed  with  this: 

Sam  has  never  yet  received  encouraging  replies  from  enemy  coun- 
tries (laughter),  because  the  enemy  knows  full  well  that  Sam  Gom- 
pers   represents   the   American   people    and   their   determination   to 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  277 

have  no  parleying  with  enemy  representatives  until  victory  has  been 
attained,  and  until  their  government  are  in  a  position  to  negotiate 
a  clean  and  enduring  peace.  Sam  Gompers  and  his  colleagues  more 
correctly  interpret  the  attitude  of  British  labor  than  do  some  of 
those  who  arrogate  to  themselves  the  title  of  labor  leaders. 

Roberts  went  furtlier  in  illuminating  what  the  government  labor 
group  of  the  extreme  right  anticipated  from  Gompers'  visit: — 

We  know  that  the  contact  of  our  guests  with  patriotic  labor  in 
this  country  will  help  us  to  defeat  the  efforts  of  those  who  would 
trick  us  into  meeting  with  enemy  subjects. 

In  rejoinder,  Gompers  said  that  he  was 

quite  willing  that  the  so-called  intellectual  party  and  the  faddists 
should  enjoy  themselves  in  the  salons,  leaving  the  others  of  the 
working  people  to  work  out  their  destinies  as  best  they  could. 

To  quote  the  London  Times: 

Mr.  Gompers,  replying  to  the  toast,  said  that  a  few  days  before 
he  left  Washington  to  proceed  to  an  Atlantic  port  to  embark  he  had 
the  honor  of  an  interview  with  President  Wilson.  He  wanted  not 
only  to  wish  the  President  "Au  revoir,"  but  to  ask  him  whether  he 
had  something  he  might  like  him  to  tell  the  people  of  Great  Britain, 
France,  and  Italy.  The  President,  in  reply,  told  him  the  story  of  a 
little  girl  about  seven  years  of  age,  who  was  doted  upon  by  her 
parents.  On  her  birthday  she  was  given  a  box  of  blocks  of  letters. 
The  child  played  with  them  and  romped  until  the  evening,  and  when 
she  retired  to  bed  and  went  down  on  her  knees  to  pray  she  was  too 
sleepy  to  say  what  she  wanted.  Putting  the  bricks  on  the  ground, 
she  said:  "Oh,  God,  you  know  what  I  want  to  say.  Let  me  say  the 
best  thing  you  would  want  me  to  say.  Good-night.  Amen."  And 
the  President  stopped  there,  said  Mr.  Gompers,  "and  so  I  have  really 
no  message  to-day,  except  that  I  know  his  spirit — a  man  of  patience, 
a  man  of  strong  conviction,  of  deep  feeling  and  high  ideals,  and  so 
I  have  the  privilege  of  conveying  the  message  of  the  blocks  of 
bricks,  metaphorically  thrown  upon  the  floor  at  that  meeting  with 
the  President.  I  have  the  right  to  say  that  the  President  and  the 
people  of  the  United  States  are  with  Great  Britain  and  France  and 
Italy  and  all  the  Allies  in  this  struggle  to  the  end,  and  to  a  victorious 
end.  (Cheers.)  Speaking  as  one  who  in  part  represents  the  great 
masses  of  the  workers  of  America,  I  may  say  that  we  are  whole- 
heartedly in  this  struggle." 

Mr.  Gompers  proceeded  to  read  a  declaration  made  by  the  repre- 
sentatives of  organized  labor  in  America,  on  March  12,  1917,  nearly 
a  month  before  America's  entry  into  the  war.  It  was  believed,  he 
said,  that  that  declaration  had  much  influence  in  assuring  the  presi- 


2  78  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

dent  that  the  toilers  would  stand  behind  him  and  the  government  in 
whatever  course  was  taken.  After  laying  down  the  fundamental 
principles  of  right  and  justice,  the  declaration  said: — 

"We  hereby  pledge  ourselves,  in  peace  or  in  war,  to  stand  unre- 
servedly by  the  standards  of  liberty  and  the  safety  and  preservation 
of  the  institutions  and  ideals  of  our  republic.  Should  our  country  be 
thrown  into  the  maelstrom  of  a  European  conflict,  we  offer  our  serv- 
ices to  our  country  in  every  field  of  activity,  to  defend,  safeguard, 
and  preserve  the  republic  against  its  enemies,  whosoever  they  may 
be,  and  we  call  upon  our  fellow-workers  and  fellow-citizens  in  the 
holy  name  of  liberty,  justice,  freedom,  and  humanity  devotedly  and 
patriotically  to  give  like  service." 

It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  in  the  United  States  there  were  about 
12  millions  of  people  of  Teutonic  extraction.  That  was  a  tre- 
mendous problem  for  the  government.  The  government  were  not  at 
first  in  a  position  to  take  action,  but  when  outrages  and  murders 
which  had  been  perpetrated  against  the  allies  were  committed  against 
their  own  American  people,  and  when  Americans  engaged  in  peace- 
able pursuits  were  murdered  in  cold  blood,  the  die  was  at  once  cast, 
the  climax  was  reached,  and  the  government  declared  that  a  state 
of  war  existed  between  their  country  and  the  Imperial  German  gov- 
ernment. It  was  the  consciousness  of  the  attitude  of  the  organized 
labor  movement  of  their  country  that  clarified  the  situation,  and  now 
they  were  engaged  not  in  a  war,  but  in  a  crusade. 

SOCIALISM    THE    CRUX 

It  was  just  here  that  Gompers  announced  that  the  purpose  of  his 
mission  was  to  "unite"  the  Allied  workers.  But  there  were  those 
who  appraised  that  mission  contrariwise.  According  to  a  cable 
from  the  London  correspondent  to  the  New  York  Tribune  he  was 
called  upon  by  none  of  the  majority  leaders  who,  with  both  the 
international  trade  union  and  international  socialist  organizations 
disrupted  by  the  war,  had  slowly  built  a  practical  unity,  embracing 
both  elements,  on  the  model  of  the  British  Labour  Party  itself. 
For  explanation  we  have  only  to  turn  to  the  report  to  the  St.  Paul 
convention  by  the  earlier  American  delegation.  Any  allegations 
that  the  Inter- Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference  (London, 
February,  1918)  was  animated  by  defeatist  and  pro-German  forces 
were  set  aside  in  this  first-hand  American  report.  "With  the  ex- 
ception of  the  self-confessed  pacifists,"  it  said,  "we  found  the  Brit- 
ish representatives  stoutly  insisting  that  the  Allied  armies  must  be 
loyally  sustained  by  the  workers  in  industry,  and  the  German  mil- 
itary machine  defeated."     It  found,  however, 

that  the  leaders  in  Great  Britain  are  far  from  unanimous  upon  the 
advisability  of  holding  an  international  conference  and  that  there 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  279 

also  exists  a  divergence  of  opinion  on  the  part  of  those  who  do, 
upon  what  it  could  accomplish  and  the  conditions  under  which  such 
a  conference  should  be  held.  Many  of  those  who  believed  in  the 
holding  of  an  international  conference  were  vigorous  in  their  belief 
that  the  German  military  machine  must  be  defeated,  their  opinions 
being  that  such  a  conference  would  assist  in  bringing  about  this 
result  through  its  influence  upon  the  workers  of  Germany  and  Aus- 
tria, and  the  effect  upon  the  workers  in  the  allied  countries  should 
the  workers  of  the  central  powers  refuse  to  participate. 

The  report  indicated  that  back  of  the  much  discussed  issue  of 
an  inter-belligerent  conference,  the  American  opposition  was 
grounded  upon  the  fact  that  the  British  Labour  Party  was  socialist 
as  well  as  trade  union;  and  that  the  inter- Allied  conference  was  like 
it.    The  crucial  passage  in  the  report  read: 

During  the  conferences  held  in  London  and  Paris  with  repre- 
sentatives of  the  labor  movement  and  in  private  conversations  with 
many  of  the  leaders  in  both  countries,  reference  was  made  to  the 
many  existing  conditions  which  could  only  be  adequately  met  through 
the  reestablishing  of  an  effective  International  Federation  of  Labour. 
In  both  countries  it  was  the  unanimous  opinion  that  it  should  be  rees- 
tablished in  a  neutral  country.  At  present  there  exists  an  unfortu- 
nate dearth  of  official  records  of  the  several  national  trade  union 
movements,  and  owing  to  this  it  has  been  possible  for  politicians 
and  the  partisan  and  general  press  to  spread  much"  misinformation 
among  the  workers  relative  to  the  attitude  of  trade  union  leaders  and 
official  policies.  There  is  a  crying  need  for  a  much  greater  interna- 
tional exchange  of  trade  union  information,  experience  and  ideas, 
which  can  only  be  accomplished  satisfactorily  through  a  central  inter- 
national trade  union  bureau  or  secretary.  Such  an  international 
center  is  also  most  essential  so  that  greater  stability  and  unity  of 
purpose  may  be  established.  In  Great  Britain  and  upon  the  European 
continent  there  exist  to-day  among  the  workers  more  or  less  joint 
industrial  and  political  movements,  the  French  workers  having  the 
joint  committee  of  the  Confederation  Generale  du  Travail  and  the 
Socialist  Party,  while  the  British  workers  in  their  labor  party  include 
socialist  groups,  such  as  the  Independent  Labour  Party,  National 
Socialist  Party,  British  Socialist  Party  and  the  Fabian  Society. 
While  these  socialist  groups  work  with  the  trade  unions  politically, 
they  maintain  their  separate  affiliation  with  the  international  socialist 
organization.  Our  European  trade  union  brothers  are  the  best  judges 
of  what  their  political  activities  should  be  and  what  affiliations,  polit- 
ical or  otherwise,  these  should  include,  but  the  existing  condition 
tends  nevertheless  to  emphasize  the  urgent  necessity  for  a  purely 
international  trade  union  federation  at  which  the  industrial  prob- 
lems can  be  given  ample  consideration  entirely  apart  from  any  polit- 
ical movements  or  considerations.  It  is  unsafe  and  unsound  to 
passively  contemplate  the  influences  exerted  upon  the  trade  union 


28o  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

movement  in  the  great  industrial  nations  of  the  world  by  political 
leaders,  however  sincere  they  may  be,  whose  viewpoint  and  expe- 
riences are  those  of  the  theorist  and  politician.  The  policies  and 
programs  of  the  workers  must  be  formulated  by  the  workers  them- 
selves, acting  through  their  industrial  organizations,  if  their  best 
interests  are  to  be  conserved. 

For  the  significance  attached  to  this  report  by  a  newspaper  cor- 
respondent in  touch  with  the  American  labor  delegation  which  made 
it,  let  us  turn  to  another  dispatch  in  the  New  York  Tribune.  The 
Tribune  had  taken  anything  but  a  favorable  view  of  the  British  labor 
offensive.  This  dispatch  was  from  St.  Paul  at  the  time  of  the 
A.  F.  of  L.  convention: — 

.  .  .  The  mission  believes  that  the  socialist  party,  which  has  main- 
tained some  sort  of  international  organization  during  the  war,  is 
able  to  dominate  the  purely  industrial  labor  movement,  which  has 
not.  To  political  socialism,  internationally  organized,  it  attributes 
the  growth  of  the  demand  for  a  conference  with  the  Germans.  .  .  . 
The  members  of  the  mission  believe  that  the  purely  industrial  labor 
movement  should  have  as  close  an  international  organization  as  the 
socialist  political  movement,  in  order  to  combat  it. 

It  is  understood  that  the  projected  visit  of  Mr.  Gompers  to 
Europe,  recommended  in  the  closing  sentence  of  the  report,  is  to  be 
a  first  step  in  the  establishment  of  this  international  organization. 

The  mission's  report  is  extremely  frank  in  speaking  of  the  policies 
of  European  labor  bodies.  Contrary  to  published  statements,  given 
out  when  the  members  first  landed,  it  shows  that  the  majority  of 
French  and  British  labor  leaders  cling  firmly  to  their  demand  for 
an  inter-belligerent  labor  conference — another  "Stockholm,"  though 
the  demand  is  receding  somewhat  during  the  present  drives  on  the 
western  front.  .  .  .  But  the  indorsement  by  the  British  Labour  Party 
of  the  famous  inter-Allied  statement  of  war  aims  still  stands. 

A  vigorous  minority,  however,  led  by  Havelock  Wilson,  of  the 
Seamen's  Union,  is  opposing  the  conference  and  is  seeking  to  wrest 
the  labor  movement  in  England  free  from  socialist  control.  It  is 
this  minority,  presumably,  which  would  be  made  the  nucleus  of 
the  proposed  international  trade  union  federation.  .  .  . 

The  difference  between  the  American  Federation  and  the  British 
Labour  Party  is  more  than  a  difference  over  technique.  The  pro- 
posed conference,  if  by  any  chance  it  were  instrumental  in  ending  the 
war,  might  m.ake  the  socialist  party  dominant  in  Europe.  .  .  .  [  !J 

To  understand  this  alignment,  it  is  necessary  to  recall  that,  while 
under  Samuel  Gompers'  leadership  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor  had  discountenanced  efforts  to  form  a  trade  union  party ,^ 

*  In  the  course  of  an  interview  in  the  London  Times  of  September  ii, 
Gompers  described  the  relation  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  to 
American  political  activity  as  follows: 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  281 

American  socialists  did  not  confine  themselves  to  the  political  field, 
but  kept  up  a  constant  boring  process  within  the  ranks  of  the  A.  F. 
of  L.    This  found  expression  in  the  not  infrequent  baiting  of  the 

"It  was  a  mistake  to  say  that  the  American  labor  movement  took  no 
political  action,  but  it  was  true  to  say  that  it  held  itself  aloof  from  polit- 
ical parties.  In  America,  the  Federation  of  Labor  yielded  to  no  one,  or 
any  group  of  people,  the  right  to  speak  in  the  name  of  labor.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  there  was  no  political  action  which  so  far  had  proved  so  potent 
in  furthering  the  interests  of  the  working  people  as  the  political  action 
taken  by  the  American  labor  movement.  When  the  Federation  of  Labor 
had  declared  itself  on  any  project  there  was  no  one  who  undertook  to 
present  counter  propositions  or  to  take  counter  action.  They  had  always 
taken  political  action  as  wage-earners.  They  presented  to  the  political 
parties  their  demands  and  were  perfectly  willing  that  they  should  compete 
with  each  other  for  the  support  of  labor  at  the  polls.  Instead  of  creating 
a  political  party,  labor  had  adopted  the  policy  of  rewarding  their  friends 
and  opposing  their  enemies.  They  were  perfectly  impartial.  They  made 
no  promise  to  any  political  party,  and  were  not  bound  by  any  political 
party.  In  1906  they  presented  what  they  called  a  'Bill  of  grievances'  to 
the  then  president,  vice-president,  and  speaker  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, and  in  it  they  incorporated  eight  specific  grievances  and  de- 
mands for  their  rectification.  They  had  a  fight  for  it.  One  party  ignored 
their  demands ;  the  other  party  adopted  them  in  full ;  and  nearly  7,000,000 
voters  voted  for  the  party  that  supported  them.  They  succeeded  in  get- 
ting fourteen  trade  unionists  elected  to  the  House  of  Representatives,  and 
they  formed  themselves  into  a  labor  group.  In  this  way  they  secured  not 
only  remedial  legislation  for  the  evils  of  which  they  complained,  but  con- 
structive legislation  in  the  interests  of  labor  and  of  the  people,  and  helped 
to  liberalize  the  government — not  in  the  British  sense  of  liberalism — in  its 
mentality,  and  soul,  and  activity.  They  secured  not  only  relief  from  the 
decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  what  was  called  the  Hatters  case,  which 
might  be  regarded  as  on  a  par  with  the  Tafif  Vale  case,  but  rehef  from 
the  Trade  Union  Dispute  Act.  In  addition,  there  was  enacted  in  the  law 
a  section  the  first  sentence  of  which  read :  'The  labor  of  a  human  being 
is  not  a  commodity  or  article  of  commerce.'  The  old  political  economy 
idea  of  property  in  man,  property  in  wealth,  property  in  land — a  species  of 
ownership  in  a  man  who  worked  for  another — had  been  abolished  so  far 
as  the  law  of  the  land  was  concerned  and  actions  in  the  law  courts.  It 
was  now  laid  down  that  the  labor  of  a  human  being  was  inseparable  from 
the  human  being,  and  must  not  be  considered  as  an  individual  commodity 
or  an  article  of  commerce." 

Mr.  Gompers'  relation  to  British  political  activity  was  illustrated  in 
the  next  column,  where  the  Times  carried  an  account  of  his  "fight  to  a 
finish,"  "one  fell  blow"  address  at  a  luncheon  given  by  the  American 
Luncheon  Club,  at  which  "Mr.  J.  B.  McAfee  presided,  and  among  those 
present  were  Lord  Acheson,  General  Biddle,  Vice-Admiral  Sims,  General 
Sir  Nevil  Macready,  Mr.  W.  Brace,  M.  P.,  and  Mr.  Havelock  Wilson." 

Following  which  the  Times  carried  an  appeal  for  funds  by  J.  Havelock 
Wilson : 

"The  General  Election  appears  to  be  imminent  and  patriotic  labor  must 
mobilize  for  the  fray.  The  'Bolshie  bosses'  control  the  Labour  Party  ma- 
chinery and  political  funds.  They  have  appealed,  and  are  appealing,  for 
funds.    Patriotic  labor  must  also  appeal." 


i82  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

Gompers'  administration  at  the  annual  conventions  by  such  socialisv 
leaders  as  Victor  Berger.  Later,  French  syndicalism  had  its  reflex 
in  the  I.  W.  W.  movement  under  Haywood,  who  had  been  active 
in  the  Western  Federation  of  Miners  and  was  also  a  member  of  the 
Socialist  Party  executive.  He  broke  with  the  latter,  which  clung 
to  political  action  as  the  working  class  weapon,  as  against  direct 
action  and  sabotage;  but  in  his  efforts  to  organize  unskilled  labor, 
which  in  the  textile  trades,  for  example,  had  been  left  in  the  lurch 
by  the  old-line  craft  unions,  the  I.  W.  W.  ran  afoul  of  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor.  When  the  war  came,  the  American  Socialist 
Party,  with  its  large  foreign-born  element,  did  not  recede  from 
its  position  of  direct  opposition,  taken  at  St.  Louis  in  March,  191 7, 
before  war  was  declared — a  position  analogous  to  that  of  the  Inde- 
pendent Social  Democrats  in  Germany,  the  Italian  Official  Social- 
ists, the  British  Socialist  Party  and  the  furthest  left  among  the 
French,  in  line  all  of  them  with  the  historic  international  position 
of  the  socialist  movement.^  Meanwhile  the  I.  W.  W.  was  charged 
with  fomenting  strikes  and  encouraging  war  sabotage,  and  hundreds 
of  its  leaders  were  arrested.^ 

Thus  it  was  that  Gompers  was  in  a  fair  way  to  consolidate  his 
life-long  leadership  and  see  his  inveterate  antagonists  cast  into  outer 
darkness  on  the  patriotic  issue  of  the  war.  It  was  as  if  he  were 
swinging  two  dead  cats  by  the  tail  when  a  new  incarnation  of  this 
deplorable  cat  tribe  put  its  head  up  over  his  back-yard  fence  in  the 
character  of  the  British  Labour  Party,  which  could  not  readily  be 
damned  as  pro-German  because  it  was  altogether  British  and  which 
to  his  mind  confounded  trade  unionism  with  an  obnoxious  socialism 
in  what  it  called  a  reconstruction  program.  Unrebuffed  by  the  fail- 
ure of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  to  sit  in  at  its  Inter-Allied 

^  While  American  trade  unions,  such  as  the  miners,  swung  service  flags 
with  thousands  of  stars  at  their  annual  conventions,  the  Socialist  Party 
organizations,  and  especially  its  leaders  of  German  or  Austrian  birth  or 
descent,  were  under  government  surveillance,  and  its  formidable  munici- 
pal campaign  under  the  Russian  born  leader,  Morris  Hillquit,  in  New 
York  (November,  1917),  had  no  defenders  in  the  metropolitan  press  but 
the  Socialist  daily,  the  Call,  itself  often  barred  from  the  mails. 

^  Many  were  later  sentenced  (September,  1918)  to  long  terms  of  im- 
prisonment by  the  Federal  Court  at  Chicago,  Haywood  among  them ; 
while  Berger  and  five  other  Socialist  Party  officials  were  indicted  in  Chi- 
cago. [Convicted  Jan.  8,  1918].  Eugene  V.  Debs,  many  times  Socialist 
Party  candidate  for  President,  and  an  outspoken  critic  of  the  war  as  a 
struggle  of  competing  capitalisms,  was  convicted  in  a  federal  court  in 
Ohio  under  the  wartime  espionage  act — a  parallel  to  the  Liebknecht  case 
in  Germany.  Pro-war  socialists  like  John  Spargo  and  Charles  Edward 
Russell,  and  pro-war  syndicalists  like  Walling  and  Frank  Bohn,  early 
broke  with  their  old  associates  and  made  common  cause  with  the  A.  F. 
of  L.  through  the  American  Alliance  of  Labor  and  Democracy. 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  283 

Conference,  it  proposed  with  some  of  its  even  more  questionable 
confederates,  to  send  a  delegation  overseas  to  confer  with  the  "forces 
of  American  democracy"  and  call  on  the  President.  Small  wonder 
that — to  put  it  at  its  known  least — the  A,  F,  of  L.  made  no  loud 
protest  at  the  obstacles  which  the  British  government  and  the  Sail- 
ors' Union  put  in  the  way  of  the  delegation's  coming.  And  appar- 
ently so  fearful  were  its  leaders  of  the  British  virus  infecting 
American  trade  unionists  that  they  let  the  hold-up  of  the  delegates 
from  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  go  by  default  also. 

It  should  be  said  that  Gompers  and  the  A.  F.  of  L.  had  a  more 
difficult  problem  in  generating  labor  unity  behind  the  war  than  either 
the  British  or  the  French  labor  leaders.  It  took  three  years  for  the 
British  labor  movement  to  find  itself  in  the  matter  of  a  distinctly 
working-class  foreign  policy.  For  those  three  years,  the  question  of 
America's  entering  the  European  conflict  had  been  debated  in  the 
United  States  and  labor  men  in  various  parts  of  the  country  had 
actively  opposed  it.  Wilson  had  been  reelected  on  the  campaign 
cry,  "He  kept  us  out  of  war";  America  was  not  invaded;  the  Amer- 
ican industrial  centers  were  thronged  with  immigrant  workers;  with 
the  example  of  the  Russian  revolution,  insurgent  movements  sprang 
up  in  the  direction  of  workers'  councils.  Outspoken  espousal  of 
the  war — of  conscription — of  redoubled  efforts  at  production — by  the 
Gompers'  leadership  was  unquestionably  a  very  real  factor  in  swing- 
ing industrial  America  into  line  with  the  national  purpose  when 
war  was  declared. 

Nonetheless,  the  same  inhibitions  and  more  stood  in  the  way  of 
President  Wilson.  He  became  the  pioneer  of  the  new  statesmanship 
among  the  Allied  governments,  leading  them,  while  Gompers  re- 
mained the  bell-wether  of  the  rear  guard  in  labor  statesmanship, 
holding  it  back. 

Moreover,  the  opposition  to  the  Gompers'  administration  in 
years  past  had  by  no  means  been  confined  to  the  socialists  or  the 
I.  W.  W.  In  a  period  in  which  the  right  to  collective  bargaining 
was  not  yet  won,  and  when  such  strength  as  wage-earners  could 
muster  was  needed  for  its  extension  in  the  economic  field,  much 
could  be  said  for  his  policy  of  keeping  clear  of  political  action.^ 
Nobody  but  could  respect  the  consummate  ability  with  which  he  had 
held  the  conflicting  racial,  religious  and  trade  groups  together 
throughout  the  years,  built  up  the  organization  and  fended  against 

*The  continuation  of  this  policy  in  war  time  and  reconstruction  has 
been  sharply  challenged  by  the  springing  up  of  local  labor  parties  in, 
Bridgeport,  Chicago,  New  York  and  elsewhere  in  the  fall  of  1918 — the 
beginnings  of  an  insurgent  political  labor  movement  which  may  have 
important  consequences  on  the  future  both  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  and  the 
American  Socialist  Party. 


284  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

attack  from  within  and  without.  To  be  sure,  long  drawn  out  law 
suits  instigated  by  the  bitterly  anti-union  National  Association  of 
Manufacturers,  the  American  Anti-Boycott  Association,  etc.,  actu- 
ally made  his  position  within  the  movement  invulnerable.  So  long 
as  he  was  under  fire,  with  a  prison  sentence  over  his  head  due  to 
the  action  of  hostile  employers  and  reactionary  judges,  the  hands 
of  those  progressives  within  the  organization  were  tied,  who  wanted 
to  see  a  more  forward-looking  policy  toward  the  struggling  women's 
labor  movement,  toward  reforms  in  trade  union  procedure  com- 
parable to  the  stirrings  toward  democracy  in  American  political 
life,  and  toward  advances  in  social  legislation.  The  situation  had 
not  only  played  into  the  continuance  in  power  of  a  knot  of  con- 
servative labor  officials,  but  toward  their  gradual  supplanting  by 
others  who  lacked  the  old-time  ardor  and  devotion  which  built  up 
the  organization. 

The  St.  Paul  convention  was,  for  example,  unenthusiastic  and 
thoroughly  domesticated.  "The  American  working  people,"  wrote 
one  of  the  younger  labor  organizers,  "will  have  to  find  another  lead- 
ership before  idealism  and  vision  will  replace  desire  for  cheap  mon- 
etary advantage."  By  so  much  was  expressed  discontent  with  the 
failure  to  transmute  wartime  gains  in  labor  organization  and  wages, 
into  some  constructive  outgiving  on  war  aims  or  social  reconstruc- 
tion. By  so  much  was  expressed  disillusionment  with  a  leadership 
which  had  had  only  exasperation  for  the  excesses  of  the  Russian 
Revolution, — which  had  sought  unity  at  home  not  by  a  social  ap- 
peal, broad  and  affirmative  enough  to  sweep  in  the  whole  gamut  of 
working-class  aspiration,  but  by  the  downing  of  old  non-conformi- 
ties,— which  had  found  kinship  in  time-serving  factions  abroad 
whose  first  concern  in  the  peace  was  their  narrow  self-interests.  It 
had  let  suspicion  and  partisanship  stand  between  American  labor 
and  the  great  Allied  labor  and  socialist  bodies  in  their  strivings  to 
the  end  that  peace  should  not  be  needlessly  deferred  for  selfish 
advantage,  to  the  end  that  when  peace  came  it  should  not  be  in  the 
terminology  and  spirit  of  the  old  settlements  which  had  strapped 
dynastic  establishments  and  competitive  armaments  on  the  backs 
of  the  workers. 

GOMPERS  SITS  IN  W^ITH  ALLIED  SOCIALISTS 

A  distinctive  thing  in  the  Allied  labor  developments  reviewed  in 
this  book  was  that  just  as,  at  the  outset  of  the  war,  labor  and  cap- 
ital buried  their  feuds  for  the  sake  of  united  effort  in  prosecuting 
the  war,  so  now  socialists,  syndicalists  and  trade  unionists  buried 
their  feuds  in  the  interests  of  a  united  working  class  front  on  war 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  285 

aims  and  procedure.  Apparently  the  returning  American  mission 
was  so  fearsome  of  socialist  dominance  after  the  war  that  it  wanted 
American  labor  to  balk  this  unity  and  reopen  and  broaden  the 
cleavages  among  Allied  groups  while  the  war  was  on.  Gompers, 
for  the  sake  of  advantage  over  the  socialists  after  the  war,  was  to 
lend  himself  to  smashing  this  unity  which  had  done  more  than  any 
one  thing  to  keep  the  Allied  working  classes  firm  in  resistance  to 
Prussian  militarism  through  the  gruelling  months  of  its  last  great 
drives. 

Whether  or  not  the  conception  of  a  joint  labor  and  socialist 
international,  transcending  the  separate  pre-war  bodies,  and  uniting 
the  workers  of  the  world  for  industrial  democracy,  persists  over 
the  separatist  tendencies  in  after-the-war  years,  is  for  the  future 
to  decide.^  But  its  dual  program  of  military  and  moral  offensive, 
its  vision  of  a  workers'  peace,  held  while  the  war  was  on.  The 
forces  for  coherence  were  too  strong  for  dismemberment  under  the 
guise  of  a  lesser  unity.  Once  on  the  ground  at  Derby,  among  the 
trade  unionists  of  all  England,  Gompers  got  at  the  truth  of  the 
situation  and  adjusted  himself  to  it.  He  may  have  seen  that  the 
unity  he  was  booked  to  destroy  was  all  too  precious  to  destroy.  He 
at  least  saw  that  it  was  proof  against  disruption. 

Two  quotations  will  give  the  thing  in  a  nutshell.  The  first  is 
from  the  anti-administration  English  Nation: 

The  event  of  greatest  importance  at  the  congress  was  the  speech 
of  Mr.  Samuel  Gompers  as  fraternal  delegate  from  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor.  Mr.  Gompers'  coming  had  been  loudly  her- 
alded in  the  jingo  press;  we  had  been  told  again  and  again  that  he 
had  come  post-haste  from  the  United  States  in  order  to  give  Mr. 
Henderson  and  his  friends  a  trouncing;  and  all  the  "intransigeant" 
labor  leaders  had  gone  wild  with  delight  at  his  coming.  It  is  too 
soon  yet  to  say  that  their  expectations  have  been  disappointed;  but 
it  is  at  least  very  clear  that  Mr.  Gompers  means  to  feel  his  way 
warily.  .  .  .  The  truth  is,  of  course,  that  in  America  Mr.  Gompers 
had  been  regularly  fed  with  lies  about  the  labor  movement  in  this 
country.  Probably  he  arrived  in  this  country  under  the  impression, 
which  is  so  sedulously  fostered  by  the  enemies  of  labor,  that  a  few 
wire-pullers  had  captured  the  official  organization  of  the  Labour 
Party,  and  that,  at  a  word  from  his  magic  voice,  the  trade  unions 
would  flock  to  the  standard  of  Mr.  Appleton,  Mr.  Havelock  Wilson, 
and,  incidentally,  Mr.  Lloyd  George.  If  so,  his  first  day's  experience 
at  congress,  before  he  was  called  upon  to  speak,  must  have  given 

'  The  first  test  came  in  the  International  Labor  and  Socialist  Con- 
ference convened  as  result  of  the  labors  of  Huysmans  and  Henderson, 
at  Berne  in  mid-February,  1919.  (Simultaneously  an  international  trade 
union  congress  was  held  there.)  Ninety  elected  delegates  from  25  na- 
tionalities were  represented;  and  labor  achieved  its  long  advocated  work- 
ing-class gathering  concurrent  with  the  Peace  Conference  at  Versailles. 


286  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

him  a  rapid  awakening;  for  he  could  hardly  have  helped  realizing 
that  the  preponderant  feeling  at  congress  was  decisively  for  the 
Labour  Party  and  against  Mr.  Havelock  Wilson  and  his  friends.  His 
experiences  at  Derby  may  have  done  Mr.  Gompers  a  world  of 
good.  .  .  . 

The  second  is  from  the  pro-administration  London  Times: 

Mr.  Gompers  telegraphed  in  identical  terms  on  August  7  to  Mr. 
Appleton,  M.  Jouhaux  (secretary  of  the  Confederation  Generale  du 
Travail  and  head  of  the  International  Trade  Union  Secretariat), 
and  to  Mr.  C.  W.  Bowerman,  M.P.  (secretary  of  the  Parliamentary 
Committee  of  the  Trades  Union  Congress),  stating  that  if  an  inter- 
allied conference  of  bona-fide  labor  representatives  were  convened 
in  London  about  September  17,  he  and  other  delegates  from  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  would  attend.  Mr.  Appleton  and 
M.  Jouhaux  thereupon  began  to  make  preparations  for  an  Inter- 
Allied  Trade  Union  Conference  in  Paris  next  week.  Simultaneously, 
Mr.  Bowerman  and  Mr.  Henderson,  and  the  other  members  of  the 
Joint  Committee  of  the  Trades  Union  Congress  and  the  Labour 
Party,  arranged  for  an  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference 
to  be  held  in  London  on  September  17,  18,  and  19.  Mr.  Gompers 
was  notified  of  these  arrjmgements,  and  replied  that  the  Federation 
delegates  would  attend  the  London  meeting. 

Before  he  left  America  Mr.  Gompers  denied  a  report  that  he 
was  going  to  a  joint  labor  and  socialist  conference.  Socialism,  he 
said,  would  have  no  place  in  the  deliberations  of  the  American  dele- 
gates. We  have,  therefore,  a  situation  in  which  Mr.  Gompers  and 
his  colleagues  have  committed  themselves,  in  spite  of  this  denial,  to 
participation  in  a  conference  which  will  be  at  least  as  representa- 
tive of  socialism  as  of  bona-fide  trade  unionism.  Mr.  Gompers,  no 
doubt,  was  conscious  of  the  somewhat  anomalous  position  in  which 
he  found  himself  when  he  met  the  Joint  Committee  of  the  Trades 
Union  Congress  (a  purely  trade  union  body),  and  the  Labour  Party 
(a  mixture  of  socialist  and  trade  union  organizations)  at  a  private 
meeting  in  Derby  last  week.  This  may  explain  a  certain  lack  of 
incisiveness  and  confidence  which  was  noticeable  in  his  address  to 
the   Congress. 

British,  French,  Italian,  Belgian,  Serbian,  American  and  Greek 
delegates  were  in  attendance  at  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Social- 
ist Conference,^  which  opened  September   18,   19 18,  with  G.  H. 

^  In  response  to  a  request  from  Gompers,  a  statement  was  issued  show- 
ing the  composition  of  the  Conference  to  be  as  follows : 

Great  Britain. — Labour  Party  (2,500,000  members),  24  delegates. 
Trades  Union  Congress  (4,130,000  members),  18  delegates. 

France. — Socialist  Party  (70,000  members,  too  Parliamentary  deputies 
out  of  600;  1,500,000  votes  at  1914  election),  six  delegates.  Confederation 
Generale  du  Travail    (800,000  members),  six  delegates. 

Italy. — Socialist  Union  (12,000  members),  three  delegates.    Union  of 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  287 

Stuart-Bunning,  the  newly  elected  chairman  of  the  Parliamentary 
Committee  of  the  Trades  Union  Congress,  presiding.  Stuart-Bun- 
ning is  secretary  of  the  Postmen's  Federation  and  one  of  the  dele- 
gates from  the  February  conference  whose  sailing  to  America  to 
"confer  with  the  forces  of  democracy"  was  frustrated.  What  his 
undelivered  message  would  have  been  was  indicated  by  a  passage 
in  his  opening  address,  in  which  he  espoused  a  League  of  Nations 
and  paid  respect  to  the  American  President,  who,  with  his  colleagues, 

had  brought  into  our  international  affairs  a  new  life,  a  new  breath 
of  humanity,  one  of  those  breaths  which  vivify  all  that  we  do  and 
which  give  us  some  hope  for  the  regeneration  of  the  world. 

Labor  (160,000  members),  one  delegate.  Irredentist  Social  Democrats, 
five  coHbuhative  delegates. 

Belgium. — Socialist  Party  (350,000  members),  six  delegates.    Union  of 
Workers  in  France,  two  delegates. 

United  States. — Federation  of  Labor   (3,000,000  members),  five  dele- 
gates. 

Canada. — Trades  and  Labour  Congress,  one  delegate. 

Greece.— General  Labor  Federation  of  Piraeus  (60,000  members),  one 
delegate. 

Serbia. — Socialist   Party    (25,000  members),   one   delegate. 

Rumania. — National   Committee,  two  consultative  delegates. 

Russia. — Social  Revolutionary  Party,  four  consultative  delegates  (ab- 
sent).    Social  Democratic   Party,  one  consultative  delegate    (absent). 

Total,  74  full  delegates  and  12  consultative  delegates    (five  absent). 

As  the  five  delegates  from  the  Democrazia  Sociale  Irredenta  repre- 
sented a  section  which  since  the  war  had  been  identified  with  the  Allies, 
but  were  normally  Austrian  subjects,  they  were  admitted  as  consultative 
delegates.  In  a  sense  they  were  an  extreme  manifestation  of  that  distinc- 
tion between  peoples  and  governments  which  was  the  basis  of  Allied 
labour's  willingness  to  go  into  a  consultative  conference.  Incidentally,  to 
this  limited  extent,  the  American  delegates  were  sitting  in  with  "enemy 
labor" !  The  classing  with  them  of  the  Russian  Social  Revolutionary 
Party  delegates  (who  had  been  delayed  en  route)  provoked  much  discus- 
sion, hanging  on  whether  Russia  was  or  was  not  still  one  of  the  Allies. 
Kerensky  was  admitted  as  a  "guest."  The  difficulties  of  reconciling  the 
extremes  of  the  working  class  movement  were  illustrated  by  the  absence 
of  the  Official  Socialist  Party  of  Italy,  which  thus  registered  its  opinion 
of  a  conference  to  which  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  was  admitted 
and  the  American  Socialist  Party  excluded.  The  stand-off  attitude  of  the 
A.  F.  of  L.  since  the  February  meeting  was  thus  matched  by  that  of  the 
far  left.  Nor  were  the  Italians  alone.  Both  French  sections,  trade  union 
as  well  as  socialist,  placed  on  record  their  regret  that  the  American  So- 
cialist Party  was  not  invited,  and  Jean  Longuet  held  that  its  votes  "should 
not  be  given  to  the  American  Federation  of  Labor."  This  brought  the 
retort  from  Gompers :  "The  American  Federation  of  Labor  represents 
the  American  labor  movement,  and  yields  not  an  inch  to  any  other  body, 
no  matter  under  what  name  they  may  sail.  The  American  Federation 
of  Labor  in  itself  is  an  affiliation  of  the  trade  union  movement  with  more 
than  three  millions  of  members,  wage-earners,  and  none  but  wage-earners. 
It  is  the  working-class  movement  of  America." 


288  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

It  was  the  duty  of  labor,  he  said,  to  explore  any  and  every  pos- 
sible avenue  to  an  honorable  and  lasting  peace,  and  went  on: — 

Accusations  have  been  made  against  the  promoters  of  the  docu- 
ment known  as  the  war  aims  memorandum  that  they  were  defeatists. 
Such  accusations  could  only  be  made  either  out  of  crass  ignorance 
or  sheer  malevolence,  because  the  most  cursory  examination  of  that 
document  will  show  that  conditions  are  laid  down  with  which  the 
Central  Powers  must  comply,  and  unless  they  do  comply  we  are 
willing  to  go  on  fighting  to  the  bitter  end. 

On  behalf  of  the  committee  on  procedure  (Sidney  Webb  report- 
ing), first  place  in  the  proceedings  of  the  conference  was  given  to 
the  proposals  of  the  American  delegates. 

With  C.  L.  Baine  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  in  the  chair,  the  American 
labor  statement  was  put  before  the  conference  at  its  second  session: 

We  recognize  in  this  world  war  the  inevitable  conflict  between 
autocratic  and  democratic  institutions :  the  contest  between  the  prin- 
ciples of  self-development  through  free  institutions  and  that  of  arbi- 
trary control  of  government  by  groups  or  individuals  for  selfish  ends. 
It  is  therefore  essential  that  the  peoples  and  the  governments  of  all 
countries  should  have  a  full  and  definite  knowledge  of  the  spirit  and 
determination  of  this  inter-Allied  conference,  representative  of  the 
workers  of  our  respective  countries,  with  reference  to  the  prosecu- 
tion of  the  war. 

We  declare  it  to  be  our  unqualified  determination  to  do  all  that 
lies  within  our  power  to  assist  our  allied  countries  in  the  marshal- 
ing of  all  of  their  resources  to  the  end  that  the  armed  forces  of 
the  Central  Powers  may  be  driven  from  the  soil  of  the  nations 
which  they  have  invaded  and  now  occupy;  and,  furthermore,  that 
these  armed  forces  shall  be  opposed  so  long  as  they  carry  out  the 
orders  or  respond  to  the  control  of  the  militaristic  autocratic  gov- 
ernments of  the  Central  Powers  which  now  threaten  the  existence 
of  all  self-governing  people. 

This  conference  endorses  the  14  points  laid  down  by  President 
Wilson  as  conditions  upon  which  peace  between  the  belligerent  na- 
tions may  be  established  and  maintained. 

The  statement  set  out  the  14  points,  and  continued: 

The  world  is  requiring  tremendous  sacrifices  of  all  the  peoples. 
Because  of  their  response  in  defense  of  principles  of  freedom  the 
peoples  have  earned  the  right  to  wipe  out  all  vestiges  of  the  old  idea 
that  the  government  belongs  to  or  constitutes  a  "governing  class." 
In  determining  issues  that  will  vitally  affect  the  lives  and  welfare 
of  millions  of  wage-earners  justice  requires  that  they  should  have 
direct  representation  in  the  agencies  authorized  to  make  such  de- 
cisions.    We  therefore  declare  that — 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  289 

In  the  official  delegations  from  each  of  the  belligerent  countries 

which  will  formulate  the  peace  treaty  the  workers  should  have  direct 

official  representation. 

We  declare  in  favor  of  a  World  Labor  Congress  to  be  held  at 

the  same  time  and  place  as  the  Peace  Conference  that  will  formulate 

the  peace  treaty  closing  the  war. 

We  declare  that  the  following  essentially  fundamental  principles 

must  underlie  the   peace   treaty: — 

A  league  of  the  free  peoples  of  the  world  in  a  common  covenant 
for  genuine  and  practical  cooperation  to  secure  justice  and  there- 
fore peace  in  relations  between  nations. 

No  political  or  economic  restrictions  meant  to  benefit  some  nations 
and  to  cripple  or  embarrass  others. 

No  indemnities  or  reprisals  based  upon  vindictive  purposes,  or  delib- 
erate desire  to  injure,  but  to  right  manifest  wrongs. 

Recognition  of  the  rights  of  small  nations  and  of  the  principle  "No 
people  must  be  forced  under  sovereignty  under  which  it  does  not 
wish  to  live." 

No  territorial  changes  or  adjustment  of  power  except  in  furtherance 
of  the  welfare  of  the  peoples  affected  and  in  furtherance  of  world 
peace. 
In  addition  to  these  basic  principles  there  should  be  incorporated 

in  the  treaty  which  shall  constitute  the  guide  of  nations  in  the  new 

period  and  conditions  into  which  we  enter  at  the  close  of  the  war, 

the  following  declarations   fundamental  to  the  best  interests  of  all 

nations  and  of  vital  importance  to  wage-earners : — 

That  in  law  and  in  practice  the  principle  shall  be  recognized  that 
the  labor  of  a  human  being  is  not  a  commodity  or  article  of  com- 
merce. 

Involuntary  servitude  shall  not  exist  except  as  a  punishment  for 
crime  whereof  the  party  shall  have  been  duly  convicted. 

The  right  of  free  association,  free  assemblage,  free  speech,  and  free 
press  shall  not  be  abridged. 

That  the  seamen  of  the  merchant  marine  shall  be  guaranteed  the 
right  of  leaving  their  vessels  when  the  same  are  in  safe  harbor. 

No  article  or  commodity  shall  be  shipped  or  delivered  in  interna- 
tional commerce  in  the  production  of  which  children  under  the 
age  of  16  years  have  been  employed  or  permitted  to  work. 

It  shall  be  declared  that  the  basic  workday  in  industry  and  commerce 
shall  not  exceed  eight  hours  per  day. 

Trial  by  jury  should  be  established. 


THE    INTER-BELLIGERENT    ISSUE 

The  week  before  the  conference,  Gompers  had  stated  in  a  public 
interview  that  there  had  been  no  recession  from  the  position  taken 
by  the  American  Federation  of  Labor;  it  was  as  much  committed  as 


290  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

he  was  "not  to  meet  the  representatives  of  enemy  countries'^  until 
the  war  had  been  won  and  that  applies  whether  the  meeting  is  at 
Stockholm,  Berne,  or  Timbuctoo."  It  will  be  seen  that  none  of 
these  interesting  geographical  localities  was  referred  to  in  the  Amer- 
ican statement  which  made  no  mention  of  an  inter-belligerent  war- 
time labor  conference. 

By  apparently  an  amicable  division  of  labor,  that  topic  was  left 
to  the  British  delegation  which  presented  a  joint  report  of  the 
Labour  Party  executive  and  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the 
Trades  Union  Congress,  reviewing  the  replies  which  had  been  re- 
ceived to  date  from  labor  groups  in  the  Central  Empires.  The  fail- 
ure of  the  German  Majority  Socialists  to  accept  the  London  pro- 
posals as  basis  for  discussion,  or  even  the  proposals  which  the  Stock- 
holm neutral  committee  had  put  out  a  year  before,  had  created,  said 
the  report,  ''an  obstacle  to  the  holding  of  an  international  confer- 
ence," 

Both  statements  were  referred  to  a  committee  on  war  aims.  The 
inter-belligerent  conference,  not  at  this  time  a  matter  for  immediate 
decision,  was  clearly  not  to  stand  in  the  way  of  unanimity  on  the 
great  democratic  issues  imbedded  in  the  war  aims  or  on  those  two 
elements  in  procedure — labor  representation  at  the  peace  settlement 
and  a  concurrent  labor  conference — which  had  been  proposed  by  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  in  the  earlier  years  of  the  war  and 
had  been  accepted  by  the  Allied  labor  and  socialist  bodies  at  London 
in  February,  1918. 

But  it  must  not  be  presumed  that  the  inter-belligerent  conference 
project  was  therefore  abandoned.  Quite  the  contrary,  in  spite  of 
the  mortuarial  anticipations  of  the  British  right.  The  labor  cor- 
respondent of  the  London  Times,  writing  the  day  before  the  confer- 
ence opened,  had  visualized  Gompers  as  chief  undertaker: — 

The  American  Federation,  which  stands  for  3,500,000  trade  union- 
ists, will  have  nothing  to  do  with  any  conference  at  which  German 
Socialists  are  present  until  either  they  have  freed  themselves  from 
the  Kaiser's  vassalage,  or  Kaiserism  has  been  destroyed  by  the  mil- 
itary power  of  the  allies.  That  resolve,  it  can  be  stated,  is  shared 
.  .  .  [by]  .  .  .  such  men  as  Mr.  Will  Thorne,  M.P.,  Mr.  J.  Sexton, 
Mr.  Havelock  Wilson,  Mr.  T.  Richards,  M.  P.,  and  other  trade  union- 
ists, who  will  be  present  as  members  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee 
of  the  Congress  or  of  the  Labour  Party  Executive.  .  .  .  Between 
these  leaders  and  the  American  delegates  there  is  little  or  no  gap. 

But  there  will  be  other  parties  represented  at  the  conference  who 
have  nothing  in  common  with  American  labor,  [who]  .  .  .  will  con- 

*  Enemy  labor  (?)  :  it  was  apparently  part  of  the  tactics  of  the  opposi- 
tion to  blur  the  distinction  in  the  public  mind. 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  291 

front  Mr.  Gompers.  They  stand  for  "peace  by  negotiation,"  and  they 
are  ready  to  begin  the  negotiation  at  once.  .  .  .  "Stockholm"  was 
never  more  remote  than  it  is  to-day,  even  without  the  intervention  of 
American  labor.  But  to-morrow,  when  Mr.  Gompers  and  his  com- 
rades have  thrown  the  full  weight  of  their  Federation  against  the 
project,  it  will  be  still  more  remote,  for  an  International  Socialist 
Congress  from  which  American  labor  was  absent  would  be  utterly 
futile.   .  .  . 

The  Times  correspondent,  after  the  manner  of  most  of  the  press 
on  both  side  of  the  Atlantic,  was  focusing  attention  on  the  ext.-eme 
right  and  the  extreme  left  in  the  labor  movement  and  utterly  disre- 
garding the  consistent  course  held  to  by  the  British  majority  (to 
the  left  of  center)  and  held  to  by  the  great  body  of  the  Allied  labor 
leadership.  Two  days  later,  in  the  midst  of  a  debate  which  the 
Times  correspondent  thought  was  not  so  much  a  memorial  service 
as  an  "Irish  wake,"  J.  Sexton  (right)  offered  a  resolution  which  was 
read  by  Henderson  and  translated  to  the  amusement  of  the  foreign 
delegates: 

That  this  conference,  recognizing  that  the  Kaiser  and  his  ad- 
visers were  initially  responsible  for  the  present  world-war,  and  the 
devastation,  ruthless  murders,  and  infamous  inhumanity  practiced 
by  Germany,  insists  that  there  shall  be  no  peace  or  even  talk  of 
peace  until  the  Kaiser  and  his  associates  and  all  who  agree  with  him 
are  hanged  from  the  lamp-post  without  judge  or  jury. 

Sexton  meant  his  resolution  as  a  satire  on  the  catholicity  of  the  con- 
ference in  entertaining  resolutions  from  individual  delegates  (which 
the  extreme  left  had  taken  advantage  of  for  publicity  purposes),  but 
he  was  unwittingly  reducing  to  an  absurdity  the  position  of  the 
extreme  right. 

The  extreme  left  was  prepared  to  go  into  conference  with  Ger- 
man and  Austrian  labor  and  socialist  groups  without  preliminaries, 
in  the  belief  that  the  very  differences  which  separated  them  were  due 
to  isolation  across  the  iron  walls  of  the  war,  that  to  meet  was  the 
way  to  clear  these  up,  and  that  to  delay  was  to  play  into  the  hands 
of  capitalistic  forces  on  both  sides  which  wanted  a  peace  of  conquest. 
Had  the  rank  and  file  of  Allied  labor  become  convinced  that  the 
deliberate  procedure  of  the  majority  group  was  to  be  indefinitely 
thwarted  by  hostile  government  forces,  there  was  likelihood  that  the 
left  would  take  the  bit  in  its  teeth.  It  is  not  unthinkable  that  the 
British  government  recognized  this,  and  called  Gompers  off  from 
swinging  the  movement  too  far  to  the  left  in  a  mistaken  notion  that 
he  could  down  Henderson  and  swing  it  back  to  the  right. 

The  extreme  right,  on  the  other  hand,  and  with  it  American 


292  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

labor,  persisted  in  setting  up  hurdles  like  Sexton's  lamp-post  in  the 
way  of  a  meeting  of  workers'  representatives  on  neutral  soil,  demand- 
ing that  the  German  armies  must  first  be  withdrawn  and  the  Im- 
perial government  overthrown. 

The  British  majority,  now  no  less  than  in  those  first  months 
described  in  earlier  chapters,  recognized  that  as  a  practical  matter 
the  control  of  the  invading  armies  was  in  the  hands  of  the  German 
general  staff.  They  still  held  that,  while  the  Allied  armies  kept  ham- 
mering at  the  Western  front,  an  inter-belligerent  labor  conference — 
which  would  clear  up  any  overhanging  misapprehensions  and  would 
carry  conviction  as  to  their  own  determination  to  curb  any  counter 
schemes  of  conquest — might  give  the  German  working  class  the  lev- 
erage it  needed  to  topple  over  the  Pan-Germanic  regime.  And  they 
still  put  as  prerequisite,  a  convincing  acceptance  of  the  basic  demo- 
cratic principles  at  stake,  not  by  the  German  authorities  but  by 
the  German  working  class  organizations.  They  were  as  clearly  set 
as  President  Wilson  against  a  peace  "obtained  by  any  kind  of  com- 
promise or  abatement  of  the  principles  we  have  avowed  as  the  prin- 
ciples for  which  we  are  fighting."  And  in  this  their  procedure  was 
not  at  variance  with  the  prime  distinction  made  by  the  American 
President  when  that  week  he  promptly  turned  down  the  Austrian 
peace  note  suggesting  a  secret  conference  (without  a  preliminary 
show  of  hands)  and  when,  a  short  month  later,  he  transmitted  the 
subsequent  German  offer  which  accepted  his  basic  14  points. 

The  British  and  Allied  majority  held  to  their  even  course  at  this 
September  conference  in  spite  of  tugging  from  the  two  extremes. 
The  first  cleavages  came  not  over  general  war  aims  or  procedure  but 
on  the  choice  between  enunciating  distinct  labor  policies  toward  cur- 
rent issues  in  foreign  affairs  or  accepting  government  policies  whole. 
This  was  on  the  third  day  of  the  conference,  when  the  American 
labor  leaders  sat  under  the  chairmanship  of  another  of  the  inter- 
Allied  delegates,  the  frustration  of  whose  trip  to  America  had  gone 
unprotested  by  the  A.  F.  of  L. — Cachin,  a  moderate  of  the  French 
Socialist  Party. 

One  occasion  was  a  resolution  on  the  Austrian  note  which  Gom- 
pers  regarded  as  critical  of  the  British  government.  While  voting 
for  it,  he  protested  against  indirect  reflections  on  any  of  the  Allied 
governments.  He  lamented  the  difficulty  of  getting  the  American 
labor  point  of  view  before  the  attention  of  their  fellow  workers  in 
other  countries,  but  added: — "We  are  behind  our  government  100 
per  cent,  and  behind  the  Allies  whatever  may  betide."  Thomas  of 
France  (himself  a  former  member  of  ministries)  whimsically  re- 
joined that  "it  was  an  old  habit  and  perhaps  not  a  bad  one,  of  the 
socialists  of  Western  Europe  to  give  their  governments  hints  and 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  293 

pushes  now  and  then."  While  making  a  great  point  of  getting  Allied 
labor  to  subscribe  to  Wilson's  14  points,  the  American  labor  leader 
had  placed  himself  in  the  position  of  resisting  the  efforts  of  Allied 
labor  to  bring  their  own  governments  publicly  into  line  with  the 
American  President  on  those  same  points.^ 


LABOR  AND  THE  RUSSIAN  REVOLUTION 

The  issue  next  to  come  up  was  a  resolution  on  Russia  which 
bore  the  signatures  of  Huysmans  and  Vandervelde  (Belgium),  Lon- 
guet  and  Renaudel  (France),  Henderson  and  J.  Hill  (Great  Britain), 
Rossoni  and  Rosetti   (Italy),  and  Popovitch  (Serbia): — 

(i)  This  conference  sends  an  expression  of  deepest  sympathy 
to  the  labor  and  socialist  organizations  of  Russia,  which,  after  having 
destroyed  their  own  Imperialism,  continue  an  unremitting  struggle 
against  German  Imperialism. 

(2)  It  declares  that  if  the  Treaty  of  Brest-Litovsk  stands,  it 
would  confirm  the  collapse  of  the  Russian  Revolution,  and  would 
most  gravely  compromise  the  future  of  the  democracy  of  the  world. 
It  invites  the  workers  of  the  allied  countries  to  refuse  to  recognize 
any  peace  settlement  which  does  not  secure  the  complete  freedom  of 
the   Russian  people. 

(3)  On  the  other  hand,  it  puts  the  workers  of  the  allied  countries 
on  their  guard  against  the  tremendous  dangers  of  a  policy  of  inter- 
vention in  Russia  which,  instead  of  supporting  the  efforts  of  demo- 
cratic Russia,  should  favor  the  reactionary  tendencies  that  aim  at  the 
reestablishment  of  the  monarchy,  and  even,  under  the  pretext  of 
fighting  Bolshevism,  should  serve  the  reaction  against  Socialism  and 
Democracy.  It  declares  in  advance  that  to  such  a  policy  the  work- 
ing classes  of  the  Western  democracies  would  have  the  elementary 
duty  of  offering  opposition  without  stint. 

There  was  a  minority  resolution,  bearing  the  signatures  of  Baine 
and  Wallace  (America),  which  was  identical  with  the  majority 
proposal  as  to  the  first  two  paragraphs,  but  differed  from  it  in  the 
third,  which  ran  as  follows: — 

(3)  It  is  of  opinion  that  the  Allied  governments  should  make  very 
explicit  pronouncements  to  the  peoples  of  Russia  to  the  effect  that 
armed  intervention  is  taking  place  with  the  hope  of  counteracting  the 
sinister  influence  of  the  Central  Powers  upon  the  so-called  Bolshevist 
Government,  which  has  suppressed  the  utterances  and  the  aspirations 
of  the  great  majority  of  the  Russian  working  classes;  and  that  no 
military  successes  whatever  shall  be  made  the  excuse  for  arresting 

*See  page  321. 


294  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

the  march  of  the  peoples  of  Russia  towards  true  democracy.  It  looks 
to  the  Allied  Governments  to  give  tangible  proof  of  the  sincerity  of 
such  declarations  by  their  actions  in  the  occupied  districts  of  Russia. 

Henderson,  in  moving  the  majority  resolution,  said  there  was  a 
feeling  in  the  committee  that  they  had  not  sufficient  evidence  to 
justify  an  emphatic  declaration  either  for  or  against  the  present 
intervention  by  the  Allied  Governments  in  Russia.  They  therefore 
merely  warned  the  workers  of  the  Allied  countries  against  what 
might  be  the  consequences  of  that  intervention. 

Jean  Longuet  said  the  majority  of  the  French  Socialist  Party  and 
part  of  the  delegation  from  the  Confederation  Generale  du  Travail 
had  abandoned  their  ovm  resolution  (a  resolution  of  unqualified  con- 
demnation of  Allied  intervention)  and  supported  the  majority  reso- 
lution now  submitted,  which  was  originally  presented  by  M.  Vander- 
velde.  They  supported  it,  however,  because  they  understood  that 
it  expressed  sympathy  with  all  the  socialist  and  revolutionary  parties 
in  Russia,  including  the  Bolshevists,  who,  he  said,  had  only  ac- 
cepted the  abominable  Brest-Litovsk  Treaty  because  they  were  com- 
pelled by  force  of  arms.  They  supported  the  resolution  also  because 
they  considered  that  the  Allied  intervention  was  contrary  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  international  socialism  and  to  the  claim  that  peoples  should 
determine  their  own  future.  Vandervelde,  on  the  other  hand,  as- 
serted that  if  Longuet's  interpretation  held,  he  would  be  compelled 
to  abandon  his  own  text,  and  adopt  that  of  the  American  delegation. 

Eventually  resolutions  and  amendments  were  referred  back  to 
the  committee,  but  first  the  conference  agreed  that  Kerensky  should 
be  heard.  Here  again  we  can  quote  from  the  extended  report  of  his 
speech  in  the  London  Times: 

"The  part  which  Russia  has  played  in  the  common  cause  of  our 
alliance  can  never  be  struck  out  of  the  general  balance-sheet  of 
national  sacrifices.  In  the  first  years  of  the  war,  when  the  British 
Empire  was  still  organizing  its  army,  the  Russian  army  stood  between 
Europe  and  collapse,  sacrificing  millions  of  its  best  men.  Revolu- 
tionary Russia,  so  despised  at  this  moment  by  the  victorious  Govern- 
ments, concentrated  on  its  front  during  the  summer  of  last  year  the 
largest  number  of  German  troops  that  had  been  there  from  the  begin- 
ning of  the  war.  This  effort  of  revolutionary  Russia  allowed  the 
United  States,  which  entered  the  war  after  the  Russian  revolution,  to 
get  ready  for  the  combat  to  such  an  extent  that  all  the  calculations 
of  the  German  General  Staff  were  overthrown.  The  basis  of  the 
Allied  victory  has  been  watered  with  Russian  blood  too  abundantly 
for  any  one  to  entertain  the  idea,  not  very  generous  anyhow,  of 
profiting  by  the  crime  of  the  Bolshevists  against  Russia,  to  the  detri- 
ment of  the  interests  of  Russia.  .  .  . 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  295 

"Under  new  forms  the  war,  the  unorganized  struggle  of  the 
Russian  people  against  the  implacable  enemy,  has  been  continued 
without  ceasing.  You  Westerners  only  hear  distant  echoes  of  this 
violent  struggle,  such  as  the  news  of  the  peasant  rising  in  the 
Ukraine,  of  the  heroic  attempt  on  the  life  of  the  Ambassador  of 
Germany,  and  of  the  revolts  in  Moscow  and  Petrograd.  What  you 
remain  ignorant  of  is  the  enormous  work  of  organization  which  was 
accomplished  by  the  Russian  democracy — socialists.  Liberal  parties, 
intellectuals,  officers,  and,  above  all,  working-class  and  peasant  organ- 
izations— amid  the  terrible  conditions  of  the  Bolshevist  regime.  To- 
day you  are  beginning  to  see  the  result  of  this  long  work.  .  .  ." 

After  repudiating  the  suggestion  in  the  resolution  originally  put 
forward  by  Longuet,  and  now  abandoned,  that  the  allied  intervention 
had  been  called  for  by  the  capitalist  bourgeoisie  of  Russia,  and 
observing  that  it  was  hypocrisy  for  the  Socialists  of  a  country  whose 
territory  was  being  defended  by  armies  from  five  different  countries 
to  protest  against  sending  military  aid  to  any  other  country,  Kerensky 
declared  that  the  Union  for  the  Regeneration  of  Russia — a  coalition 
of  the  democratic  and  Liberal  parties  in  Russia — could  not  have 
refrained  from  taking  the  responsibility  of  calling  in  the  aid  of  allied 
troops.  The  Union,  he  said,  was  seeking  to  restore  the  Russian  front, 
and  also  to  restore  the  Russian  State  as  a  single  State  with  a  central 
power.  .  .  . 

The  tone  of  alarm  in  the  resolution  before  the  Conference  cor- 
responded exactly  with  the  truth.  The  danger  was  to  be  found  in 
the  tendency  of  certain  men  of  great  influence  in  the  governments 
to  maintain  in  Russia  certain  isolated  persons  and  private  organiza- 
tions which  desired  to  seize  power  in  Russia  by  the  Bolshevist  method 
of  violence.  While  a  kind  of  anti-democratic  government  might 
succeed  for  a  time  in  Russia,  with  the  help  of  foreign  military  force, 
it  could  only  be  maintained  as  the  Bolshevist  tyranny  was  maintained 
— by  bayonet.  The  representatives  of  the  Allies  in  Russia  ought 
to  receive  a  categorical  instruction  from  their  Governments  to  give 
up  every  kind  of  political  relation  with  separate  people  and  private 
organizations  and  to  act  strictly  in  accord  with  the  existing  demo- 
cratic governments  to  which  he  had  referred.  "I  was,"  added  M. 
Kerensky,  "and  I  remain,  in  favor  of  intervention,  because  I  am 
persuaded  that  the  democratic  forces  of  the  allies  must  come  to  the 
aid  of  the  democratic  forces  of  the  Russian  people  in  order  to  insure 
their  safety."     (Cheers.) 

The  following  morning,  Henderson  reported  for  the  committee 
on  the  international  situation,  repeating  the  first  two  paragraphs  of 
the  Russian  resolution  and  substituting  a  third  to  take  the  place  of 
the  conflicting  proposals  submitted  the  previous  day: 

(3)  The  conference  is  of  opinion  that,  in  conformity  with  Article 
6  of  the  "14  points"  of  President  Wilson,  the  present  effort  of  the 
Allied  governments  to  assist  the  Russian  people  must  be  influenced 


296  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

only  by  a  genuine  desire  to  preserve  liberty  and  democracy  in  an 
ordered  and  durable  world-peace,  by  which  the  beneficent  fruits  of 
the  revolution  shall  be  made  permanently  secure. 

SQUELCHING  THE  EXTREME  LEFT 

The  new  paragraph  was  adopted  by  a  large  majority,  the  debate 
being  closed  over  the  protest  of  Longuet,  Mrs.  Philip  Snowden  and 
others  of  the  British  left.^  The  conference  referred  to  its  perma- 
nent bureau  the  cabled  appeal  of  the  Russian  Social  Revolutionary 
Party  for  a  committee  of  Allied  socialists  to  visit  Russia  and  bear 
witness  to  the  situation. 

There  followed  a  statement  from  the  conference's  War  Aims 
Committee  which  was  in  a  sense  a  merger  of  the  declarations  made 
on  the  opening  day  by  the  American  and  British  delegations.  The 
three  first  paragraphs,  as  moved  by  J.  P.  Frey  [A.  F.  of  L.]  pro- 
voked a  clash  between  the  two  extremes.     They  read: 

The  conference  welcomes  the  participation  of  the  American  Fed- 
eration of  Labor,  and  recognizes,  in  agreement  with  the  Federation, 
in  this  world-war  a  conflict  between  autocratic  and  democratic  insti- 
tutions, a  contest  between  the  opportunities  of  self-development  from 
free  institutions  and  that  of  arbitrary  control  of  government  by 
groups  or  individuals  for  selfish  ends. 

The  conference  agrees  that  after  four  years  of  war  it  is  essential 
that  the  peoples  and  the  governments  of  all  countries  should  have 
a  full  and  definite  knowledge  of  the  spirit  and  determination  of  this 
Inter-Allied  Conference,  representative  of  the  workers  of  the  re- 
spective countries,  with  reference  to  the  prosecution  of  the  war. 

In  accordance  with  the  declaration  of  the  previous  conference 
of  February,  1918,  the  conference  declares  it  to  be  its  unqualified 
determination  to  do  all  that  lies  in  its  power  to  assist  the  allied 
countries  in  the  marshaling  of  all  their  resources  to  the  end  that 
the  armed  forces  of  the  Central  Powers  may  be  driven  off  the  soils 
of  the  nations  which  they  have  invaded  and  now  occupy,  and,  fur- 
thermore, that  these  armed  forces  shall  be  opposed  so  long  as  they 
carry  out  the  orders  or  respond  to  the  control  of  the  militaristic  and 
autocratic  governments  of  the  Central  Powers,  which  now  threaten 
the  existence  of  all  self-governing  peoples. 

J.  W.  Kneeshaw,  an  I.L.P.  member  of  the  British  Labour  Party 
executive,  denied  that  the  war  was  a  fight  between  autocracy  and 

^  With  the  close  of  hostilities  in  the  West,  the  British  Labour  Party  in 
November,  1918,  in  a  pre-election  manifesto  warned  "the  coalition  govern- 
ment against  opposing  the  new  European  democracies"  and  demanded 
"the  immediate  withdrawal  of  Allied  forces  from  Russia."  By  the  end 
of  the  year  (1918)  the  full  weight  of  British  labor  agitation  was  directed 
toward  this  end. 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  297 

democracy.^  The  British  people  were  told  in  1914  that  they  went 
into  the  war  to  defend  Belgium  against  German  aggression,  and  for 
four  years  they  had  supported  the  war  in  that  belief.  But,  he 
charged  that  on  August  5,  1918,  for  the  first  time  Lloyd  George  de- 
clared in  the  House  of  Commons  that  Britain  went  to  war  because 
of  a  secret  compact  with  France.  "Even  now,"  said  Kneeshaw, 

we  do  not  know  what  the  war  is  about.  You  say  the  Central  Powers 
must  withdraw  from  occupied  territories,  but  surely  it  is  equally 
wicked  for  us  to  occupy  Persia,  Mesopotamia,  and  other  territories. 
You  call  on  the  German  armies  to  cease  to  obey  orders.  That  condi- 
tion would  lead  to  an  indefinite  prolongation  of  the  war.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  the  secret  treaties  make  it  quite  clear  that  the  purpose  of  the 
Allied  governments  in  the  war  is  precisely  the  same  in  character  as 
the  purpose  of  the  governments  of  Central  Powers — to  secure  an 
extension  of  imperialistic  power. 

J.  Maxton,  a  fellow  member  of  the  I.L.P.  on  the  Labour  Party 
executive,  supported  him  and  charged 

the  American  delegation  with  being  two  and  a  half  years  late  in 
fighting  for  their  principles,  and  reminded  them  that,  for  all  their 
boasted  free  institutions,  Comrades  Debs  and  Mooney  were  now  in 
American  jails. 

In  reply,  Frey  warmly  defended  the  belief  of  American  labor  that 
the  allies  were  fighting  for  democracy  against  autocracy,  and  Gom- 
pers,  who  is  an  old  hand  at  heckling  debate,  also  had  back  at  Knee- 
shaw cmd  Maxton.    To  quote  the  London  Times: 

These  ultra-goody-goody  men,  I  trust  them  not.  (Cheers  and 
laughter.)  The  American  Federation,  Mr.  Gompers  went  on,  had 
asked  for  a  new  trial  for  Mooney,  who  was  charged  with  killing  22 
people  by  a  bomb,  but  they  had  no  sympathy  for  Debs  and  his  asso- 
ciates, who  conspired  to  thwart  the  American  war  effort.  It  was 
absurd  to  say  that  there  was  no  difference  between  the  democratic 
institutions  of  the  Allies  and  the  German  rule. 

Mr.  Kneeshaw  : — I  did  not  say  the  words  you  are  now  putting 
into  my  mouth. 

Mr.  GoMPERS  retorted: — Believe  me,  if  it  were  in  my  power,  I 
would  not  put  "words"  into  the  delegate's  mouth.  (Some  laughter.) 
I  wonder  what  the  consequence  would  be  to  the  democracies  of  Great 
Britain,  France,  and  the  United  States  if  it  were  possible  for  Ger- 
many to  win  the  war.     (Cheers.)   .  .  .  We  of  the  American  labor 

*  "Yet  this  war  with  its  terrific  toll  of  human  lives  is  the  product  of 
artificial  conditions  and  policies  and  is  repugnant  to  the  thought  and 
political  progress  of  the  age.  .  .  ."  From  the  report  of  the  Executive 
Council,  American  Federation  of  Labor,  Philadelphia,  Nov.  9-21,  1914. 


298  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

movement  have  the  direct  mandate  of  our  people,  and  we  are  going 
through.     (Cheers.) 

J.  Sexton  (right)  of  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  de- 
nounced Kneeshaw's  speech  as  "treacherous"  and  declared  that  it 

was  the  essence  of  hypocrisy  for  a  member  of  the  party  which  pro- 
moted the  Leeds  convention  for  the  establishment  of  Soviets  in  Eng- 
land to  object  to  a  suggestion  that  German  soldiers  should  rebel 
against  their   Government. 

But  the  majority  leaders  had  not  left  it  to  the  American  delegation, 
or  to  the  British  right  to  deal  with  this  outburst  from  the  left. 
Sidney  Webb  assured  the  conference  that  the  majority  of  the  Brit- 
ish delegation  were  in  absolute  disagreement  with  almost  everything 
that  Kneeshaw  said.  J.  H.  Thomas  declared  that  whatever  might 
be  said  about  governments,  the  government  of  Great  Britain  was 
the  reflex  of  the  intelligence  of  the  people;  and  that  was  not  the  case 
in  Germany.  "The  fact  that  we  were  not  prepared  for  war  proved 
that  our  intentions  were  not  those  of  Germany."  Nor  were  the 
British  alone.  Albert  Thomas  of  the  French  Socialist  Party  said 
that 

whatever  documents  had  been  published  in  the  last  four  years,  the 
French  workers  still  found  intact  the  justification  of  their  fight  for 
justice,  independence,  and  freedom. 

Remembering  the  deep  anxiety  which  was  felt  at  the  time  by  the 
French  Government  and  people  when  they  thought  there  was  no 
support  coming  to  them,  and  reading  the  documents  which  had  since 
been  published,  he  would  assert  without  hesitation  that  until  Great 
Britain  actually  entered  the  war  there  was  no  promise  whatever 
that  she  would  take  sides.  It  was  only  after  the  invasion  of  Belgium 
had  begun  that  the  British  Government  made  up  their  minds  to 
enter  the  struggle. 

It  is  one  of  the  principles  of  the  British  labor  movement  not  to 
sacrifice  unity  for  uniformity.  It  goes  with  the  Englishman's  instinct 
for  personal  liberty.  To  those  whose  test  of  British  labor  sentiment 
would  lie  in  an  owlish  conformity  by  a  row  of  delegates,  the  incident 
might  have  been  an  exhibit  of  hopeless  discord.  Rather,  it  revealed 
the  reserve  powers  for  coherence  among  free  men. 

The  British  labor  men  were  not  so  naive  as  the  Americans  about 
the  fundamental  economic  and  nationalistic  factors  that  entered  into 
the  war.  They  could  see  the  woods  of  modern  Europe — and  could 
subscribe  to  the  war  as  one  of  "free  institutions"  against  "the  arbi- 
trary control  of  government  by  groups  or  individuals  for  selfish 
ends";  but  they  also  knew  the  trees  of  modern  Europe,  and  the 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  299 

whole  challenge  of  their  labor  offensive  was  to  see  to  it  that  the 
war,  in  the  self-controlled  terms  of  its  settlement,  should  ring  true 
to  the  aspiration  of  the  common  men  who  were  fighting  it. 

The  third  paragraph  of  the  three  quoted — made  m.uch  of  by 
those  who  had  from  the  first  misconstrued  the  British  labor  offen- 
sive— was  lifted  all  but  bodily  from  the  American  statement  but 
linked  it  properly  with  the  Allied  statements  of  the  Februaries  (191 5 
and  1918).  It  put  the  resistant  edge  on  the  Allied  labor  blade. 
There  were  two  things  for  v/hich  British  labor  will  fight  to  the  last 
ditch,  said  J.  H.  Thomas  to  Hamilton  Holt  of  the  League  to  Enforce 
Peace,  on  a  visit  to  England  in  mid-summer:  one  to  prevent  an 
imperialistic  peace,  the  other  to  create  a  league  of  nations.  "The 
war  has  lasted  for  four  years,"  wrote  the  New  Statesman  in  Sep- 
tember, "but  the  disaster  of  its  continuation  is  as  nothing  compared 
with  the  disaster  of  ending  it  before  its  roots  have  been  torn  up  and 
the  objects  for  which  we  have  been  fighting  achieved." 

But  while  Allied  labor  was  prepared  to  do  all  that  lay  in  its 
power  to  sustain  the  Allied  countries  in  the  marshaling  of  all  their 
resources  to  the  end  of  throwing  back  invasion  and  throwing  over 
Prussian  militarism,  it  did  not  propose  to  hold  up  its  war  aims 
labor  offensive  until  these  ends  were  secured  by  the  military  weapon. 
It  proposed  to  use  the  other  edge  of  its  blade  to  the  same  ends — 
and  with  ever  its  democratic  goal  in  view. 

On  the  vote,  no  hand  was  raised  against  the  three  passages:  the 
I.L.P.  group  and  their  French  and  Serbian  sympathizers  of  the  left 
alone  abstaining  from  voting. 

Unanimous  assent  was  given  to  paragraphs  endorsing  the  14 
propositions  of  President  Wilson,  as  in  harmony  with  the  Allied 
Labour  declaration  of  February,  19 18;  and  to  paragraphs  endorsing 
in  the  main  the  distinctly  industrial  planks  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  state- 
ment, as  again  in  harmony  with  the  February  memorandum.  Re- 
subscription  to  the  American  proposals  as  to  labor's  participation 
at  the  peace  settlement  were  combined  with  these  matters,  and  this 
part  of  the  statement  as  adopted  read: 

The  Conference  further  welcomes  the  confirmation  in  all  essen- 
tial features  which  the  fourteen  propositions  laid  down  by  President 
Wilson,  and  presented  to  the  Conference  by  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor,  give  to  the  proposals  contained  in  the  Memorandum 
on  War  Aims  agreed  to  by  the  Conference  of  the  24th  February, 
1918.  The  Conference  accepts  these  fourteen  propositions  as  a  con- 
cise summary  of  the  main  principles  which  the  Memorandum  on  War 
Aims  expounds  in  detail  on  the  various  questions  to  be  dealt  with, 
and  agrees  that  only  in  these  principles  can  the  groundwork  for  a 
lasting  peace  be  found. 


300  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

The  Conference  accordingly  calls  upon  the  several  governments 
of  the  allied  nations  unequivocally  to  adopt  these  principles,  as 
formulated  by  President  Wilson  and  expounded  in  the  Memorandum 
on  War  Aims,  in  a  joint  declaration  of  allied  policy,  and  the  Con- 
ference recommends  the  representative  organizations  of  the  workers 
in  each  country  to  bring  pressure  to  bear  upon  the  Government  in 
order  to  induce  it  to  adopt  this  course. 

The  Conference  once  more  takes  note  of  the  tremendous  sacri- 
fices which  the  world  is  requiring  from  the  mass  of  the  people  in 
each  country.  It  declares  that  because  of  their  response  in  defense 
of  principles  of  freedom  the  peoples  have  earned  the  right  to  wipe 
out  all  vestiges  of  the  old  idea  that  the  government  belongs  to  or 
constitutes  a  "governing  class."  In  determining  issues  that  will 
vitally  affect  the  lives  and  welfare  of  millions  of  wage-earners,  jus- 
tice requires  that  they  should  have  direct  representation  on  the 
agencies  authorized  to  make  such  decisions.  The  Conference  there- 
fore declares  that — 

1.  In  the  official  delegations  from  each  of  the  belligerent  coun- 
tries which  will  formulate  the  peace  treaty  the  workers  should  have 
direct  official  representation.^ 

2.  A  world  labor  congress  shall  be  held  at  the  same  time  and 
place  as  the  peace  conference  that  will  formulate  the  peace  treaty 
closing  the  war.^ 

The  Conference  further  welcomes  the  declaration  by  the  Amer- 
ican Federation  of  Labor  of  the  fundamental  principles  to  be  included 
in  the  peace  treaty,  as  being  in  substantial  agreement  with  those 
applied  in  detail  in  the  Memorandum  on  War  Aims  of  2oth-24th 
February  appended  hereto,  and  also  with  the  fourteen  propositions 
of  President  Wilson. 

The  Conference  further  expresses  its  general  sympathy  with  the 
aspirations  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor.  The  Conference 
places  special  importance  on  the  proposals  which  provide  for  an 
advanced  conception  of  the  right  of  the  worker  to  complete  self- 
control,  and  for  the  unabridged  freedom  of  association  and  expres- 
sion. 

The  Conference  declares  its  objection  to  all  treaties  and  agree- 
ments purporting  to  bind  nations,  which  have  been  or  may  be  con- 
cluded by  their  governments  without  immediate  publicity  and  with- 
out Parliamentary  authority  or  ratification ;  and  protests  against  the 

*Vandervelde  (Belgium)  was  perhaps  the  only  one  of  the  Allied 
labor  or  socialist  leaders  to  be  included  in  the  main  official  delegations 
as  such ;  for  Barnes,  a  member  of  the  British  delegation,  had  re- 
signed from  the  Labour  Party;  Bissolati  (Italian  Reformist)  resigned 
from  the  Italian  Cabinet  as  a  protest  against  its  failure  to  renounce  the 
secret  treaties;  and  Gompers  was  not  named.  He  was  appointed,  however, 
with  several  others,  to  the  commission  entrusted  with  drafting  the  in- 
ternational labor  convention  to  enter  into  the  peace  treaty,  and  was 
chosen  its  chairman. 

'  Held  at  Berne,  February,  1919.    See  page  285. 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  301 

continuation  for  a  single  day  of  the  present  war  for  the  purpose  of 
obtaining  any  objects  aimed  at  by  any  of  the  secret  treaties  or 
agreements  which  are  not  in  accord  with  the  fourteen  propositions 
of  President  Wilson  or  the  Memorandum  on  War  Aims. 

Next  came  the  passages  lifted  from  the  statement  of  the  British 
delegation  summing  up  the  results  of  the  'diplomacy  of  democracy": 

The  Conference,  taking  note  of  the  declarations  and  replies  made 
to  the  Memorandum  on  War  Aims  of  20th-24th  February  by  the 
labor  and  Socialist  movements  of  the  several  countries  in  alliance 
with  the  Central  Powers, 

1.  Expresses  its  satisfaction  with  the  replies  of  the  Bulgarian 
and  Hungarian  Socialist,  and  the  German  Social  Democratic  party 
of  Austria,  in  so  far  as  they  accept  the  decisions  of  the  London  Con- 
ference as  the  basis  of  discussion  at  an  international  meeting;  and 

2.  Expresses  its  deep  regret  that  the  reply  of  the  German  Major- 
ity— though  their  published  letter  expresses  their  willingness  to  at- 
tend an  international — does  not  accept  the  London  proposals,  and 
fails  officially  to  accept  even  the  neutrals'  proposals  as  a  basis  of 
discussion.  So  long  as  these  points  remain  unanswered  they  create 
an  obstacle  to  the  holding  of  an  international  conference. 

The  Conference  directs  that  the  commission  to  be  appointed  for 
this  purpose  shall,  as  soon  as  may  be  possible,  draft  and  forward 
replies  through  the  press  and  other  channels  to  the  labor  and  Social- 
ist parties  whose  replies  indicate  a  willingness  to  discuss  the  situa- 
tion on  the  agreed  basis,  pointing  out  that  the  difficulty  in  the  way 
of  an  immediate  international  meeting  is  that  the  German  response 
does  not  fulfill  the  conditions  laid  down  by  the  Conference  of 
20th-24th  February,  and  urging  them  to  use  their  influence  to  get 
the  German  attitude  changed,  and  also  to  send  a  considered  reply 
to  the  German  Majority.  ... 

Here  again  the  majority  leadership  was  in  for  an  attack  from 
the  French  left.  Longuet  protested  emphatically  against  the  phrase 
that  the  non-acceptance  of  the  London  memorandum  by  the  German 
majority  was  an  obstacle  to  the  holding  of  an  international  confer- 
ence. He  favored  an  unconditional  meeting  with  German  labor, 
stating  that  France  had  already  1,700,000  dead,  and  that  protrac- 
tion of  the  war  meant  extermination.  But  on  the  vote  to  change 
the  wording  from  "obstacle"  to  "difficulty,"  only  twenty-five  votes 
were  registered  for  the  change.    To  quote  the  London  Times: 

Mr.  Henderson  said  the  memorandum  demanded  reparation  for 
Belgium.  Would  M.  Longuet  show  them  a  single  word  from  the 
German  Government  or  the  Majority  Socialists  accepting  that  condi- 
tion? Had  the  condition  been  fulfilled  in  regard  to  Alsace-Lorraine, 
which  they  decided  was  a  question  not  of  territorial  adjustment,  but 
of  right?     M.  Longuet  wanted  an  unconditional  conference.     He 


302  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

could  have  it,  but  he  would  have  it  without  British  labor.  (Cheers.) 
British  labor  was  not  going  to  defend  German  Socialism  and  sacrifice 
world  democracy.  They  declared  on  February  14,  1915,  and  at  every 
conference  they  had  held  since,  that  a  victory  for  Germany  would 
mean  the  destruction  of  democracy  and  the  annihilation  of  liberty. 

GOMPERS   GOES   DOWN  WITH  THE  EXTREME  RIGHT 

It  was  then  that  the  attack  shifted  to  the  extreme  right;  and 
Gompers  struck  at  that  element  in  the  Allied  labor  procedure  which 
he  had  opposed  throughout  the  year.     He  moved  an  amendment: 

That  we  will  meet  in  conference  with  those  only  of  the  Central 
Powers  who  are  in  open  revolt  against  their  autocratic  governments. 

Again  to  quote  the  London  Times: 

He  said  he  hoped  to  live  to  see  the  day  when  the  workmen  of  all 
nations  would  refuse  not  only  to  take  up  arms,  but  to  manufacture 
them,  and  by  this  means  make  war  impossible.  (Cheers.)  He  had 
not  lost  faith  in  the  Internationale,  but  to  end  the  struggle  now  would 
mean  the  breaking  out  of  a  new  war  as  soon  as  the  autocratic  gov- 
ernments could  get  their  machinery  to  work  again. 

Gompers  was  voted  down,  as  decisively  as  had  been  Longuet, 
63  to  26  (the  Canadians  and  Italian  Trade  Unionists  voting  with 
the  A.  F.  of  L.  delegation).  The  majority  of  63  included  the  full 
British,  French,  Belgian,  Serbian  and  Greek  delegations  and  three 
votes  cast  by  the  Italian  Socialists.  W.  J.  Bowen  announced  that 
if  another  conference  were  held  during  the  war  to  which  delegates 
from  enemy  countries  were  to  be  admitted  the  representatives  of  the 
A.  F.  of  L.  would  not  take  part.  However,  the  American  Federa- 
tion agreed  to  be  represented  in  the  new  bureau  appointed  by  the 
conference  to  carry  out  its  policy  and  to  draft  replies  to  the  parties 
of  the  Central  Powers. 

The  touchstone  of  the  whole  inter-belligerent  conference  pro- 
cedure had  been  the  old  question  of  passports,  which  dated  back  to 
the  initial  refusal  of  the  governments  at  the  time  of  the  Stockholm 
meetings.  Not  only  had  the  Inter-Allied  Conference  in  February 
been  balked  in  sending  delegates  to  America,  and  later  the  British 
Trades  Union  Congress;  but  Henderson  and  Bowerman  had  been 
held  up  in  going  to  France,  and  the  Dutch  Socialist  Troelstra  had 
been  prevented  from  coming  to  England  in  June  to  report  to  the 
Allied  labor  leaders  on  the  position  of  the  German  Socialists  toward 
the  war  aims  memorandum.  In  these  things,  Havelock  Wilson  and 
the  Sailors'  Union  had  been  partners  to  the  obstruction.    Official 


IN  FRANKLIN'S  FOOTSTEPS  303 

copies  of  Allied  labor's  war  aims  memorandum  had  been  held  up 
in  transit  by  both  the  British  and  the  German  governments.  The 
Derby  Trades  Union  Congress  had  passed  a  vigorous  protest  as  to 
passports  and  the  French  Confederation  had  gone  further  and 
threatened  strike  action  if  labor  were  continually  thwarted.  The 
American  delegates  abstaining,  the  inter-Allied  conference  adopted 
the  following,  57  to  10 — 

The  conference,  in  view  of  the  refusal  of  the  governments  to 
afford  passport  facilities  to  the  properly  elected  representatives  of 
organized  labor,  condemns  the  policy  of  the  governments,  and  de- 
clares that  the  continuance  of  such  policy  is  bound  to  lead  to  an 
acceptance  of  the  government's  challenge  by  the  organized  labor 
movement. 

The  conference  warns  the  governments  that  the  patience  of  the 
organized  working  people  is  rapidly  becoming  exhausted  by  the 
continued  affronts  which  are  thus  offered. 

The  resolutions  were  carried  paragraph  by  paragraph  through- 
out, voting  being  by  nationality,  the  American,  British  and  French 
delegates  being  allotted  20  votes,  the  allotments  to  other  delegations 
being  proportionately  smaller.  The  conference  reached  virtually 
unanimous  decisions.  Allied  and  American  joined,  upon  (i)  the  Aus- 
trian peace  proposals,  (2)  Russian  intervention  and  (3)  war  aims. 


It  was  a  saying  of  Poor  Richard  that  if  one  "would  have  a  thing 
well  done,  go;  if  not,  send."  In  the  winter  and  spring  of  1918, 
Gompers  sent,  and  the  information  brought  back  by  the  American 
labor  delegation  which  visited  England  at  the  expense  of  the  British 
government,  was  of  a  distorted  sort,  both  in  fact  and  in  prophecy. 
Their  chairman  described  Henderson  and  his  group  as  weak-kneed 
in  the  war  and  political  parasites  and  what  not.  The  efforts  of  the 
American  labor  mission  to  wean  them  from  heresy  failed;  the  group 
of  pro-war  Socialists  posted  off  to  try  their  hand,  but  with  very 
similar  results  and  very  similar  prophecies. 

Then  Gompers  himself  went. 

If,  as  it  was  freely  circulated  in  the  American  press,  his  mission 
was  to  bring  back  Henderson's  head  on  a  platter, — if  his  coming 
was  to  set  up  a  trade  union  rival  to  the  British  Labour  Party,  split 
off  from  it  the  great  Trades.  Union  Congress  in  their  joint  war-aims 
program,  and  set  up  a  purely  trade  union  inter-Allied  body  to 
take  the  place  of  the  inter-Allied  Socialist  and  Labour  Conference — 
if  these  things  were  the  purposes  of  his  trip  (as  they  were  the  sub- 
ject of  the  confident  prophecies),  it  was  a  complete  failure.    In  the 


304  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

last  chapter  we  saw  how  these  separatist  movements  fizzled.  Gom- 
pers  brought  home  two  old  silver  plates,  the  gift  of  British  labor, 
but  Henderson's  head  was  on  neither. 

But  in  a  larger  and  finer  sense,  Gompers'  trip  was  a  success. 
A  convinced  opponent  to  socialism  and  to  political  action,  he  is, 
none  the  less,  out  of  a  lifetime's  experience  in  adjusting  difficulties 
between  labor  bodies,  used  to  dealing  with  organized  realities.  And 
the  British  labor  movement  is  an  organized  reality.  Gompers  was 
big  enough  to  deal  with  it  as  it  is  and  not  as  it  had  been  painted. 
At  the  American-Allied  meeting.  New  World  labor  joined  with  Old 
in  reaffirming  opposition  in  the  field  to  Prussian  militarism.  Old 
World  labor  joined  with  New  in  reaffirming  belief  in  President  Wil- 
son's statement.  New  World  labor  joined  with  Old  in  subscribing 
to  the  Allied  labor  war  aims.  Old  World  labor  subscribed  to  the 
industrial  charter  offered  by  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 
Old  and  new  united  in  reaffirming  the  American  labor  proposals  as 
to  labor  representation  at  the  time  of  settlement.  When  it  came 
to  the  issue  of  the  inter-belligerent  conference,  the  two  parted  and 
went  their  ways. 

That  question,  after  all,  was  one  of  tactics — tactics  which  were 
rendered  out  of  date  within  a  month  by  governmental  exchanges 
across  the  war  that  were  as  bitterly  attacked  in  some  quarters  as 
labor's  attempts  had  been;  but  tactics  whose  influence  in  provoking 
democratic  risings  among  the  German  and  Austrian  and  Bulgarian 
workers  only  the  future  historian  will  be  able  adequately  to  ap- 
praise. Once  on  the  ground,  Gompers  split  with  British  labor  on 
the  subject  of  tactics,  but  joined  with  it  on  the  broad  program 
for  an  unimperialistic  peace  which  was  common  to  both  and  to  the 
American  President.  Said  Gompers  on  the  floor  at  the  American- 
Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference  in  London,  September, 
1918: 

It  has  been  said  in  Germany  that  I  came  to  Europe  to  squelch 
the  flame  of  revolt  among  the  workers  of  England.  I  have  been  in 
England  now  three  weeks  and  I  have  not  seen  the  flame.  I  have 
only  seen  a  spark  here  and  there,  far  removed  from  the  torch  that 
is  burning  in  the  hands  of  British  labor,  and  the  labor  of  France,  to 
carry  on  until  we  have  the  liberty  to  live  our  own  lives. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 

DEMOCRACY   COMES    TO   THE   TEST 

The  opening  day  of  the  American-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist 
Conference  in  London,  [September  i8,  191 8]  word  came  of  the 
Austrian  peace  note. 

Within  a  week  of  its  closing  session,  at  which  President  Wilson's 
14  points  became  in  a  new  sense  the  common  platform  of  these 
workers  of  the  New  World  and  the  Old,  the  President  responded, 
in  his  Liberty  Loan  address,  to  the  ''assemblies  and  associations"  of 
"plain  workaday  people,"  with  a  declaration  as  to  five  elements 
which  must  go  into  a  democratic  peace — elements  that  had  been 
stressed  by  the  Labour  and  Socialist  Conferences  of  February  and 
September.  Within  the  month  President  Wilson's  14  points  of 
January  8  and  his  five  of  September  27,  became  the  basis  of  the 
appeal  for  peace  of  the  new  German  chancellor. 

Swiftly,  in  those  autumn  weeks  of  19 18,  democracy  scored  its 
double  triumph.  The  stuff  of  that  triumph  was  compounded  of 
military  force  and  political  ideas.  From  the  English  Channel  to 
the  River  Jordan,  its  armies  drove  victoriously  at  the  forces  of 
super-militarism.  From  Berlin  and  Vienna  and  Constantinople,  the 
capitals  of  autocracy  sent  word  that  they  accepted  the  terms  set 
forth  by  the  elected  American  President. 

Here  in  the  United  States  we  had  seen  less  clearly  perhaps  than 
had  democrats  in  England  and  France  what  distinctly  new  strength 
America  brought  into  the  Allied  front  in  addition  to  what  was  reen- 
forcing.  Men,  money,  ships,  supplies — these  things  they  had  em- 
ployed before,  these  things  mixed  with  courage  and  high  resolve  and 
the  fighting  capacity  of  the  liberty  loving  peoples  of  Britain  and 
France,  of  Belgium  and  Italy,  Greece,  Serbia  and  the  rest.  With 
two  million  men  transported  overseas,  and  with  divisions,  corps 
and  armies  in  the  thick  of  the  great  battles  from  the  channel  to 
Switzerland,  we  of  the  United  States  are  stirred  that  American  help 
turned  the  scales  when  that  help  was  most  sorely  needed. 

But  the  American  President  brought  into  the  conflict  still  an- 
other force.  He  set  going  a  moral  and  political  drive.  It  remained 
for  Woodrow  Wilson  to  parallel  the  military  with  a  diplomatic 
offensive. 

305 


3o6  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

In  the  older  terminology,  the  latter  was  designed  to  weaken 
enemy  morale.  Threats,  the  spread  of  rumors  of  enemy  weaknesses, 
and  such  like  had  been  used  before  on  both  sides  with  result  only 
to  stiffen  each  people  to  save  themselves.  The  American  President 
knew  a  greater  TNT  and  employed  it  in  his  public  outgivings.  It 
was  made  up  of  equal  parts  of  justice,  democracy  and  the  vision  of 
a  world  order  that  should  mean  a  chance  for  peace  on  earth  and 
for  good  will  among  men. 

It  gave  the  oppressed  peoples  of  Central  Europe — Pole  and 
Czech  and  Jugo-Slav — a  feeling  that  their  cause  was  our  cause  as 
a  matter  not  of  favor  but  of  general  principle.  To  prompt  stirrings 
of  political  revolt  from  the  Danube  to  the  Baltic  might  be  to  weaken 
the  enemy  morale — if  we  look  at  the  mere  negative  side  of  the 
process.  But  it  had  its  positive  and  truer  side  and  that  was  to 
awaken  democratic  faith  and  fellowship  among  "suppressed  but 
inextinguishable  nationalities"  and  to  release  forces  which,  once  a 
set-back  came  to  the  organized  power  of  the  Prussian  military 
machine,  might  assert  themselves. 

So,  also,  to  distinguish  between  the  German  people  and  the  Ger- 
man government  that  had  engineered  the  war,  to  hold  aloft  a  vision 
of  a  democratic  world  order  in  which  they  might  find  a  place  and 
fair  dealing,  once  they  had  shaken  loose  from  their  masters,  and 
from  their  masters'  dreams  of  world  domination,  was  in  a  negative 
sense  to  weaken  enemy  morale;  but  it  had  a  positive  and  truer 
side.  It  made  for  wellsprings  of  unrest  among  the  liberal  and 
labor  forces  of  Germany  which,  once  a  rift  or  check  came  to  the 
Prussian  machine,  might  well  up  into  a  tidal  democratic  force. 

Now,  it  must  be  said  that  American  performance  lagged  woe- 
fully behind  the  insight  and  leadership  of  the  President's  utterance. 
It  took  twelve  to  eighteen  months  for  his  intuition  to  work  its  way 
down  through  the  strata  of  administrative  policy  and  action.  Our 
natural  allies  in  fanning  the  embers  of  racial  freedom  in  Central 
Europe,  lay  close  at  hand  in  the  immigrant  populations  of  American 
cities  and  industrial  districts.  Yet,  in  191 7,  the  average  American 
newspaper  got  little  farther  than  damning  all  hyphenates.  By  19 18 
they  had  begun  to  publish  with  glad  acclaim  the  strange  guttural 
names  of  peoples  who  were  potentialities  in  the  struggle  to  throw 
off  autocracy  in  Europe,  as  they  had  been  fellow  searchers  with  us 
for  the  treasures  of  democracy  in  the  New  World.  On  the  Fourth 
of  July,  celebrations  in  a  hundred  American  cities  were  happy 
auguries  and  symbols  of  Tennyson's  parliament.  Colorful  parades 
put  this  new  inrush  of  race  and  blood  and  loyalty  in  a  living  stream 
down  our  public  thoroughfares.  The  change  in  public  opinion  was 
paralleled  in  official  action.     Through  the  foreign  press  bureau  of 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  307 

the  Committee  on  Public  Information,  the  ties  of  immigrant  folk 
with  the  oppressed  nationalities  of  Central  Europe  were  used,  like 
the  antennae  of  some  new  wireless,  to  message  the  fraternity  of 
America.  The  change  in  the  policy  of  the  General  Staff  was  equally 
slow  in  coming  and  equally  significant.  The  Allied  governments  had 
seen  the  importance  of  visualizing  the  struggle  of  the  oppressed 
peoples  by  bringing  into  the  Western  front  troops  who  could  bear 
their  colors.  While  France  was  recruiting  a  Polish  legion  from  the 
United  States,  groups  of  non-English  speaking  soldiers  at  American 
cantonments  were  suspect  to  commissioned  and  non-commissioned 
officers,  broken  up  and  passed  around  as  undesirables.  At  one  camp 
where  3,000  were  studying  English,  1,853  were  transferred  at  one 
time.  In  January,  the  War  Department,  wishing  to  be  humane, 
issued  an  order  that  all  aliens,  meaning  all  subjects  of  Germany  and 
Austria-Hungary,  might  have  the  privilege  of  honorable  discharge. 
When  such  enlightened  commanders  as  Major  General  Glenn  at 
Camp  Sherman,  set  about  a  different  course,  encouraged  meetings 
at  which  Her  Slovane  was  sung — the  Slovak  patriotic  hymn,  for- 
bidden in  the  Austrian  army, — the  response  was  instant.  "We  have 
had  a  meeting  and  changed  our  minds  about  the  discharge,"  said 
thirteen  men  out  of  a  group  of  fourteen.  "We  want  to  fight  for 
America."  "My  father  and  grandfathers  never  had  any  oppor- 
tunity to  fight  for  liberty,"  wrote  a  Slovene.  Then  came  another 
undiscriminating  order,  forbidding  all  these  soldiers,  who  had  re- 
fused discharge  but  who  were  not  full  citizens,  from  training  for 
fighting.  This  would  have  meant  a  full  division  ^  lost  to  the  com- 
batant strength  of  the  army  had  the  order  stood.  It  was  not  until 
the  summer  and  fall  of  19 18  that  these  immigrant  groups  won  gen- 
eral public  sanction  and  official  recognition.  They  won  it  largely 
as  result  of  their  own  self-assertion,  stimulated  by  the  coming  to 
America  of  Prof.  Masaryk,  to-day  president  of  the  new  Bohemian 
republic,  and  by  the  friendly  agitation  of  such  Americans  as  Prof. 
Herbert  Adolphus  Miller  of  Western  Reserve  University.  In  Octo- 
ber tidings  went  overseas  of  a  new  liberty  bell  cast,  a  new  declara- 
tion written  and  signed  by  representatives  of  twelve  peoples,  at 
Independence  Hall  in  Philadelphia. 

Similarly,  it  took  eighteen  months  for  the  President's  intuition 
and  expression  of  the  common  feeling  among  the  workers  of  the 
world,  battened  down  by  the  war,  to  reach  the  point  of  a  real 
exchange  with  the  "counsels  of  plain  men."  Here  our  natural  alUes 
were  the  organized  workers  among  the  Allies,  who  as  the  London 
Times  shrewdly  put  it,  could  in  their  declarations  address  the  "la- 

*  "The  Lost  Division,"  by  Herbert  Adolphus  Miller,  The  Survey,  June 

IS.  1918. 


3o8  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

bor  socialists  of  enemy  countries"  and  speak  "a  language  to  which 
they  are  accustomed."  Yet  for  nine  months  after  the  two  great 
British  labor  bodies  had  acclaimed  the  President's  statement  of  war 
aims,  no  sign  of  recognition  came  to  them  from  Washington  in  their 
unequal  fight  to  espouse  the  cause  of  a  democratic  league  of  nations, 
of  economic  freedom  and  an  unselfish  settlement,  against  forces 
which  disparaged  and  opposed  those  ends.  There  was  no  public 
intimation  that  the  delegation  the  Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Con- 
ference desired  to  send  to  America  to  "confer  with  the  forces  for 
democracy"  would  be  received.  Bowerman  cabled  Gompers  in  June, 
protesting  against  the  "action  of  the  American  government"  in  hold- 
ing up  the  passports  of  the  two  delegates  from  the  British  Trades 
Union  Congress.  "Nobody  who  ought  to  get  out  of  England  will 
be  denied  a  passport,"  said  a  member  of  the  returned  American 
labor  mission.  "I  thought  of  this  attitude  of  some  of  the  dele- 
gates," wrote  John  A.  Fitch,  industrial  editor  of  The  Survey,  in 
reviewing  the  St.  Paul  convention  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.,^ 

when  I  heard  one  of  the  undoubted  leaders  of  the  federation  say 
on  the  floor  of  the  convention  that  in  no  other  country  had  the  trade 
union  movement  been  accorded  the  recognition  of  its  government 
that  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  has  received  from  the  present 
administration.  It  led  me  to  wonder  whether,  after  all,  it  was  either 
government  which  took  the  initiative  in  barring  the  British  delegates. 

In  stark  contrast,  all  questions  of  passports  were  waived  in  the 
eleventh  hour  dispatch  at  that  time  of  the  delegation  of  the  Social 
Democratic  League  on  their  foreign  mission  which  brought  them 
into  conflict  with  the  majority  opinion  in  British  labor.  They  were 
joined  on  the  other  side  by  Charles  Edward  Russell,  who  for  months 
had  been  the  London  representative  of  the  United  States  Committee 
on  Public  Information.  The  American  Alliance  for  Labor  and 
Democracy  was  the  subject  of  a  commendatory  message  from  Pres- 
ident Wilson  during  the  period  in  which  it  was  sending  out  Wallings' 
unbridled  attacks  upon  Henderson.  Conceivably  the  administra- 
tion's information  was  as  distorted  and  as  fallacious  as  had  been 
Gompers'.  Conceivably  control  of  international  labor  relations  was 
regarded  in  Washington  as  the  province  if  not  the  reward  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor.  Gompers'  services  to  the  adminis- 
tration were  thought  of  so  highly  by  a  member  of  the  cabinet  that 
one  issue  of  the  New  York  Nation  was  actually  barred  from  the 
mails  for  venturing  the  lese  majesty  of  criticizing  the  intent  of  his 
trip — an  interference  with  the  liberty  of  the  press  which  contrasted 

^  "British  Labor  Out  of  It :  The  American  Federation  of  Labor  Con- 
vention at  St.  Paul,"  by  John  A.  Fitch,  The  Survey,  June  29,  1918. 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  309 

painfully  with  that  broad  spirit  of  toleration  and  ingrained  belief  in 
liberty  which  assured  the  Labour  Leader  and  the  Herald  and  many 
other  papers  free  circulation  throughout  England,  in  spite  of  their 
sweeping  condemnations  not  only  of  private  citizens  but  of  the 
Premier  himself.  Only  when  The  Nation's  case  was  carried  by 
its  publisher  to  the  White  House  was  the  Postmaster  General  over- 
ruled. When  all  known  factors  are  given  their  due  weight,  there 
remains  a  margin  of  facts  which  are  unexplained,  and  which  only 
the  future  can  clear  up  from  the  assumption  that  President  Wilson 
wanted  to  play  a  lone  hand.  For,  both  officially  and  unofficially,  the 
White  House  must  have  had  creditable  reports  of  the  truth  that 
has  been  emphasized  in  this  book  that  the  British  labor  movement, 
and  with  it  Allied  labor,  was  the  one  organized  force  in  all  Europe — 
or  for  that  matter  in  America — which  could  be  counted  upon  to 
stand  unflinchingly  for  the  democratic  principles  which  President 
Wilson  had  set  forth  as  America's  stake  in  the  war — the  principles 
which,  as  nothing  else,  gave  body  to  democratic  endurance  among 
the  Allies,  and  provoked  a  ferment  of  revolt  among  the  common 
people  of  the  Central  Empires. 

It  was  not  until  his  September  27  (1918)  address  that  the  Pres- 
ident hailed  the  Allied  workers  in  issuing  his  tremendous  call  to  the 
smoldering  flam.es  of  democratic  self-determination  in  Germany  and 
Austria. 

To  the  suppressed  peoples  and  the  constrained  working-classes  of 
the  Central  Empires,  he  spoke  in  this  fashion: — 

At  every  turn  of  the  war  we  gain  a  fresh  consciousness  of  what 
we  mean  to  accomplish  by  it.  When  our  hope  and  expectation  are 
most  excited  we  think  more  definitely  than  before  of  the  issues  that 
hang  upon  it  and  of  the  purposes  which  must  be  realized  by  means 
of  it.  For  it  has  positive  and  well-defined  purposes  which  we  did 
not  determine  and  which  we  cannot  alter.  No  statesman  or  assem- 
bly created  them;  no  statesman  or  assembly  can  alter  them.  They 
have  arisen  out  of  the  very  nature  and  circumstances  of  the  war. 
The  most  that  statesmen  or  assemblies  can  do  is  to  carry  them  out 
or  be  false  to  them.  They  were  perhaps  not  clear  at  the  outset;  but 
they  are  clear  now.  The  war  has  lasted  more  than  four  years  and 
the  whole  world  has  been  drawn  into  it.'  The  common  will  of  man- 
kind has  been  substituted  for  the  particular  purposes  of  individual 
states.  Individual  statesmen  may  have  started  the  conflict,  but 
neither  they  nor  their  opponents  can  stop  it  as  they  please.  It  has 
become  a  peoples'  war,  and  peoples  of  all  sorts  and  races,  of  every 
degree  of  power  and  variety  of  fortune,  are  involved  in  its  sweeping 
processes  of  change  and  settlement.  We  came  into  it  when  its  char- 
acter had  become  fully  defined  and  it  was  plain  that  no  nation  could 
stand  apart  or  be  indifferent  to  its  outcome.    Its  challenge  drove  to 


310  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

the  heart  of  everything  we  cared  for  and  lived  for.  The  voice  of 
the  w^ar  had  become  clear  and  gripped  our  hearts.  Our  brothers 
from  many  lands,  as  well  as  our  own  murdered  dead  under  the  sea, 
were  calling  to  us,  and  we  responded,  fiercely  and  of  course. 

The  air  was  clear  about  us.  We  saw  things  in  their  full,  convinc- 
ing proportions  as  they  were;  and  we  have  seen  them  with  steady 
eyes  and  unchanging  comprehension  ever  since.  We  accepted  the 
issues  of  the  war  as  facts,  not  as  any  group  of  men  either  here  or 
elsewhere  had  defined  them,  and  we  can  accept  no  outcome  which 
does  not  squarely  meet  and  settle  them.    Those  issues  are  these : 

Shall  the  military  power  of  any  nation  or  group  of  nations  be 
suffered  to  determine  the  fortunes  of  peoples  over  whom  they  have 
no  right  to  rule  except  the  right  of  force? 

Shall  strong  nations  be  free  to  wrong  weak  nations  and  make 
them  subject  to  their  purpose  and  interest? 

Shall  peoples  be  ruled  and  dominated,  even  in  their  own  internal 
affairs,  by  arbitrary  and  irresponsible  force  or  by  their  own  will 
and  choice  ? 

Shall  there  be  a  common  standard  of  right  and  privilege  for  all 
peoples  and  nations  or  shall  the  strong  do  as  they  will  and  the  weak 
suffer  without  redress? 

Shall  the  assertion  of  right  be  haphazard  and  by  casual  alliance 
or  shall  there  be  a  common  concert  to  oblige  the  observance  of  com- 
mon rights? 

No  man,  no  group  of  men,  chose  these  to  be  the  issues  of  the 
struggle.  They  are  the  issues  of  it;  and  they  must  be  settled — 
by  no  arrangement  or  compromise  or  adjustment  of  interests,  but 
definitely  and  once  for  all  and  with  a  full  and  unequivocal  acceptance 
of  the  principle  that  the  interest  of  the  weakest  is  as  sacred  as  the 
interest  of  the  strongest. 

This  is  what  we  mean  when  we  speak  of  a  permanent  peace,  if 
we  speak  sincerely,  intelligently,  and  with  a  real  knowledge  and  com- 
prehension of  the  matter  we  deal  with. 

We  are  all  agreed  that  there  can  be  no  peace  obtained  by  any 
kind  of  bargain  or  compromise  with  the  governments  of  the  Central 
Empires,  because  we  have  dealt  with  them  already  and  have  seen 
them  deal  with  other  governments  that  were  parties  to  this  struggle, 
at  Brest-Litovsk  and  Bucharest.  They  have  convinced  us  that  they 
are  without  honor  and  do  not  intend  justice.  They  observe  no  cove- 
nants, accept  no  principle  but  force  and  their  own  interest.  We 
cannot  "come  to  terms"  with  them.  They  have  made  it  impossible. 
The  German  people  must  by  this  time  be  fully  aware  that  we  cannot 
accept  the  word  of  those  who  forced  this  war  upon  us.  We  do  not 
think  the  same  thoughts  or  speak  the  same  language  of  agreement. 

FROM  UNREST  TO  UPRISING  IN  GERMANY 

How  deep  seated  and  competent  the  forces  of  unrest  in  Germany 
and  Austria-Hungary  had  become  during  the  months  of  191 8,  the 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  311 

ordinary  person  had  no  means  for  knowing.  The  President's  appeal 
had  been  directed  most  consistently  to  release  those  of  liberalism 
and  national  aspiration ;  that  of  Allied  labor,  to  working  class  action. 
One  thing  was  certain:  that  in  the  late  winter  and  spring  the  Pan- 
Germans  bore  down  all  opposition  at  home  in  their  supreme  attempt 
to  break  through  in  the  west  and  dictate  peace  as  they  had  done 
at  Brest-Litovsk. 

Nevertheless  Camille  Huysmans  had  brought  word  to  the  Eng- 
lish labor  leaders  as  early  as  January  20,  19 18,  that  the  effect  of 
President  Wilson's  statements  inside  the  Central  Empires  quite  out- 
ran anything  the  German  government  or  the  German  press  ad- 
mitted. Gains  had  been  made  in  popular  self-assertion  the  summer 
before,  but  during  the  latter  half  of  191 7  there  had  been  a  stiffening 
up  of  the  dominant  opinion,  said  Huysmans.  The  German  Majority 
Socialists,  he  thought,  were  not  so  much  out  of  joint  with  demo- 
cratic terms  of  settlement,  as  that,  given  the  public  temper,  they 
were  hopeless  of  carrying  them.  They  had  yet,  however,  to  recog- 
nize— much  less  to  believe  that  the  German  nation  would  recognize 
— that  the  question  of  Alsace-Lorraine  had  been  reopened  by  the 
war  as  a  question  of  right. 

British  labor,  out  of  its  own  experiences  with  a  government  labor 
faction,  if  for  no  other  reason,  had  few  illusions  as  to  devil  and 
deep  sea  boundaries  of  the  German  Majority  Socialists — their  fac- 
tional coercive  powers  and  their  insecurity,  both  above  and  below. 
But  it  had  other  reasons.  Karl  Kautsky,  speaking  for  the  Inde- 
pendent Social  Democratic  Party  of  Germany,  in  the  conversations 
before  the  Stockholm  Committee,  on  June  29,  191 7  (according  to 
the  official  report  of  the  proceedings  as  republished  by  the  British 
Labour  Party  in  August,  19 18), 

pointed  out  how  the  socialists  of  the  so-called  majority  in  Germany 
appeared  to  have  the  same  peace  program  as  the  Independent  Social 
Democrats,  since  both  demand  a  peace  without  annexations  or  indem- 
nities, but  how  the  agreement  consisted  solely  in  the  use  of  the  same 
words,  to  which  the  other  section  assigned  a  different  meaning. 

He  contended  that  the  views  of  the  majority  party  were 

animated  by  the  spirit  of  a  nationalist  policy  based  on  force  and  of 
militarist  thought,  which  rendered  their  attitude  towards  each  prob- 
lem dependent  on  the  military  situation.  This  he  demonstrated  in 
detail  from  the  clauses  dealing  with  Austria  and  Turkey,  with  Bel- 
gium, Poland,  and  Alsace-Lorraine. 

Vormdrts  published  a  leading  article  in  March,  19 18,  in  reply 
to  the  war  aims  memorandum  of  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Social- 


312  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

ist  Conference  at  London  in  February.    As  reprinted  in  the  London 
Times,  Vorwdrts  [Majority  Socialist]  said: 

The  Allied  socialists  have  now  evolved  an  ideal  of  the  coming 
peace  conditions  to  which  we  can,  on  many  points,  subscribe,  though 
not  on  all.  But  the  points  on  which  we  disagree  have  no  great  prac- 
tical significance.  What  is  more  important  is  the  question  whether 
such  ideal  demands  have  any  prospect  of  realization,  or  whether  a 
great  part  of  the  socialistic  work  which  is  to  contribute  to  a  lasting 
peace,  will  not  be  achieved  after  the  conclusion  of  that  peace. 

The  German  Social  Democrats  were  the  first  to  undergo  the 
experience  that  it  is  immensely  difficult  for  the  socialist  party  of  a 
victorious  state  to  realize  their  ideal  demands.  The  peace  with 
Russia  has  not  turned  out  as  we  had  imagined  it.  Yet  the  influence 
of  the  socialists  in  France,  England  and  Italy  is  not  greater,  but 
less,  than  in  Germany.  In  such  circumstances  can  idealistic  demands, 
wise  or  unwise  as  they  may  be  politically,  be  described  as  more  than 
a  house  of  cards  to  be  overthrown  by  any  wind  that  blows?  In 
place  of  an  abstract,  universal,  just  formula  would  it  not  be  better 
to  seek  a  basis  of  practical  agreement  answering  to  conditions  as 
they  now  exist? 

Possibly  the  Allied  socialists  consider  absolutely  just  certain  de- 
mands which  they  make  upon  Germany  and  her  allies,  but  they 
should  not  overlook  the  fact  that  agreement  of  the  Central  Powers 
to  such  demands  nowadays  is  not  expected.  There  are  in  Germany 
two  tendencies — one  which  would  be  ready  to  conclude  peace  at 
once  with  the  West  upon  the  basis  of  restoration  and  the  status  quo 
ante  helium;  and  another,  which  demands  alterations  favorable  to 
German  extension  and  power.  No  tendency  willing  to  concede 
alterations  unfavorable  to  Germany  can  be  said  to  exist.  For  instance, 
a  German  peace  negotiator  who  would  be  ready  to  make  concessions 
with  regard  to  Alsace-Lorraine  or  Posen  would  haye  no  prospect  of 
being  able  to  maintain  himself  in  office  for  twenty-four  hours.  Pos- 
sibly the  Entente  sees  in  this  a  fresh  proof  of  the  moral  obstinacy 
of  Germany,  but  this  is  no  moral  question,  only  one  of  facts. 

If  at  the  peace  conference  a  proposal  were  made  by  negotiators 
that  the  Central  Powers  should  allow  Czechs,  Slovaks  and  Jugo- 
slavs to  form  a  free  union  of  Danube  states  in  place  of  the  Austro- 
Hungarian  Empire,  what  would  be  the  answer?  We  beg  to  be 
excused  for  saying  that  the  Central  Powers  would  simply  laugh ! 
Because,  first  of  all,  the  fact  would  be  overlooked  that  in  the  Aus- 
tro-Hungarian  Empire  there  are  others  besides  the  above  named 
peoples.  In  addition  to  which,  it  would  be  extremely  Utopian  to 
present  demands  to  an  unconquered  state  to  operate  on  its  own 
body. 

The  idea  that  Alsace-Lorraine  peoples  should  be  consulted  repre- 
sents a  decided  step  down  from  the  former  attitude  of  unqualified 
disannexation.  Practically  no  great  result  could  be  expected.  If 
victorious,  France  would  never  forego  her  "rights"  to  Alsace-Lor- 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  313 

raine  or  allow  them  to  be  in  any  way  disputed.  At  the  best  we 
should  be  treated  to  a  poor  comedy  of  self-determination.  In  the 
same  way,  the  German  bourgeois  sees  no  military  grounds  for  con- 
senting to  a  revision  of  the  Alsace-Lorraine  question.  Demands  for 
such  would  be  absolutely  without  a  chance  for  success.  Apart  from 
this  there  are  very  good  grounds  for  refusing  to  allow  the  posses- 
sion of  Alsace-Lorraine  by  Germany  to  be  any  further  disputed. 
The  population  of  Alsace-Lorraine  belongs  ethnographically  to  the 
German  people.  The  province  has,  according  to  the  Social  Demo- 
cratic conception,  the  right  to  her  freedom  within  the  German 
Empire,  but  her  right  to  secede  from  it  altogether  is,  to  say  the  least, 
a  very  debatable  question. 

Meanwhile,  the  time  for  such  more  or  less  academic  considera- 
tions is  past.  All  socialistic  effort  must  concentrate  upon  a  peace 
which  is  tenable  and  bearable  for  all.  And  why  should  it  be  unbear- 
able for  England,  France,  Belgium  and  Italy  if  a  peace  were  con- 
cluded which  restored  in  the  main  the  pre-war  conditions  in  the 
West  ?  In  any  case  they  would  do  well  to  remember  that  a  program 
is  unworkable  as  a  practicable  peace  program  which  is  drawn  up 
beforehand  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  Central  Powers.  Such  a  pro- 
gram could  not  be  realized  either  by  an  international  Socialist  con- 
gress or  by  a  diplomatic  conference,  but  only  by  the  victory  of  the 
Entente. 

Yet  as  early  as  midwinter  of  19 18,  there  were  indications  that 
in  trade  union  after  trade  union,  the  Independent  Socialists,  not 
a  few  of  whose  leaders  were  in  prison,  were  undermining  this  major- 
ity element  that  had  knuckled  in  to  the  government.  Thus,  to  quote 
some  paragraphs  in  the  Manchester  Guardian  of  March  2,  19 18,  on 
"The  Rift  in  German  Socialism": — 

Socialism  in  Germany  has  two  aspects,  parliamentary  and  trade 
union.  The  Parliamentary  Party  split  relatively  early,  and  after 
efforts  at  compromise  failed,  the  Independents  set  about  constitut- 
ing their  own  party  organization  throughout  the  country.  Defection 
from  the  Majority  Party  has  from  time  to  time  increased  the  strength 
of  the  Independents  in  the  Reichstag,  and  beyond  doubt  their  growth 
in  the  country  among  the  masses  has  been  much  more  rapid.  But 
hitherto  the  Majority  Party  have  maintained  absolute  control  over 
the   socialist   trade  unions. 

What  this  meant  was  shown  during  the  strikes.  The  directorate 
of  the  trade  union  organization  denounced  the  strike,  and  the  trade 
unions  withheld  strike  pay.  I'he  vice-chancellor  cited  this  last  as 
one  of  the  effective  causes  of  the  collapse  of  the  strike  movement. 
The  strikers,  on  their  part,  made  plain  that  they  had  still  less  con- 
fidence in  the  trade  union  leaders  than  in  the  Reichstag  majority 
deputies.  It  was  hoped  that  the  strike  would  have  educated  the 
Majority  Party  to  its  duty,  but  there  is  little  trace  of  a  change  of 


314  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

heart  and  mind.  The  Majority  very  tepidly  rebuked  the  government 
for  its  treatment  of  Russia,  but  are  determined  not  to  go  into  oppo- 
sition or  to  separate  from  the  "bourgeois"  party,  who  with  them  con- 
stitute the  majority  of  the  Reichstag. 

The  Independent  Socialist  Party  is  drawing  the  moral  that  it 
must  establish  itself  in  the  trade  unions  also  and  wrest  the  monopoly 
of  them  from  a  party  which  has  proved  unfaithful  to  its  socialist 
provisions.  A  beginning  is  being  attempted  at  Stuttgart  to  form  a 
new  trade  union  organization  under  independent  auspices.  Of  course 
this  is  denounced  by  the  Majority  as  the  extension  of  a  fratricidal 
struggle.  But  the  Independents,  not  unnaturally,  hold  that  the  world, 
after  years  of  devastated  war,  has  got  to  the  stage  at  which  only 
realities  matter,  not  labels;  and  that  where  there  is  clear  conflict  of 
ideas  and  actions  it  is  humbug  to  speak  of  brotherhood.  This  new 
movement  deserves  the  closest  watching.  It  is  likely  to  develop 
more  quickly  than  the  political  split  which  was  the  prelude  to  it. 

As  a  straw,  also,  take  this  paragraph  from  an  article  published 
in  the  Tdgliche  Rundschau  in  June — some  time  after  the  Allied  labor 
memorandum  may  be  supposed  to  have  percolated  among  the  Ger- 
man workers: 

When  placards  which  display  the  world  situation  and  our  position 
as  against  our  enemies  are  openly  ridiculed  and  described  as  lies 
and  deception,  and  when,  at  a  meeting  of  the  Fatherland  Party 
broken  up  by  socialists,  the  cry  can  be  heard:  "He  who  fights  against 
England  is  an  enemy  of  mankind,"  the  initiated  understand  from 
what  direction  the  wind  is  blowing. 

Scheideman,  speaking  on  July  5,  before  the  Reichstag  on  von 
Kiihlmann's  speech,  charged  that  "the  gentlemen  at  main  headquar- 
ters" were  "self-deceived  if  they  believe  they  are  able  to  impose 
peace  on  the  world." 

"In  principle,  we  socialists,"  this  majority  party  leader  said,  "are 
against  all  annexations,  all  violence,  whether  with  great  or  little 
sacrifices,  or  whether  useful  or  useless  for  the  conquering  peo- 
ple. .  .  .  The  oppression  is  the  more  revolting  the  greater  the  dif- 
ference between  the  strength  of  the  oppressor  and  the  oppressed." 
But  he  still  based  his  position  less  on  questions  of  principle  than  on 
questions  of  fact.  In  the  matter  of  facts  he  may  be  considered  a 
competent  witness  of  the  following: — 

Amongst  the  masses  an  intensified  bitterness  exists,  not  only 
among  the  industrial  working  people,  but  also  among  the  great 
masses  of  the  officials,  clerks,  middle  classes  and  agricultural  people, 
and  throughout  the  country  there  is  only  one  feeling  which  can  be 
summarized  in  one  word — finish.     Finish  honorably,  of  course.     On 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  315 

this  point  there  is  no  difference  of  opinion.  Finish  without  humilia- 
tion of  Germany,  but  finish  (strong  applause  from  the  left).  The 
people  know  the  truth  and  are  completely  unmoved  by  any  attempts 
to  impress  them.  The  people  want  to  end  this  war  as  quickly  as 
possible  for  a  war  of  defense  which  has  succeeded. 

The  government  must  be  the  bearer  of  this  inflexible  will  of 
the  people.  We  demand  from  you  that  the  government  recognize 
the  right  of  Belgium  to  complete  independence,  without  any  reserve, 
and  that  she  does  everything  in  order  to  gain  us  a  speedy  peace  with- 
out harming  the  interests  of  Germany,  A  government  which  would 
follow  such  a  broad  policy  of  peace  we  should  gladly  support,  but  for 
a  government  which,  after  four  years  of  war,  has  not  been  able  to 
suppress  the  military  law,  we  cannot  vote  the  credits.  It  is  high 
time  to  recognize  the  needs  of  the  people  and  to  act  accordingly. 

Strikes  and  the  threats  of  strikes  became  so  acute  in  July  and 
August,  and  the  increase  of  the  vote  for  socialist  candidates  of  the 
radical  and  republican  minority  at  local  elections  became  so  pro- 
nounced that  the  government  sought  refuge  from  the  gathering 
storm  by  inviting  the  leaders  of  the  moderate  Socialist  Majority  to 
come  into  the  cabinet.  In  answer,  Scheidemann  and  his  colleagues 
produced  an  ultimatum  reiterating  the  peace  aims  of  the  July,  191 7, 
resolution,  with  various  new  ones,  and  amplified  by  a  number  of 
detailed  demands  for  drastic  changes  in  the  constitution  and  civil 
law,  including  complete  freedom  of  the  press  and  of  assembly  and 
appointment  of  all  cabinet  officers  from  the  Reichstag  majority. 
The  Hertling  cabinet,  with  its  Junker  backing,  we  are  now  told,  was 
unable  to  accept  these  conditions  and  fell. 

How  much  of  these  domestic  tendencies  would  have  been  con- 
veyed to  the  British  and  Allied  leaders  by  Troelstra,  the  Dutch 
Socialist  who  was  denied  passports  to  England  in  June,  we  do  not 
know.  He  cabled  (July  i,  1918)  that  the  German  majority  Social- 
ists would  accept  the  peace  proposals  of  the  Stockholm  neutral  com- 
mittee— a  cable  which  led  Henderson  to  make  a  hopeful  announce- 
ment. 

This  Henderson  later  retracted,  for  a  letter  by  Herman  Miiller 
of  the  Socialist  Democratic  Party,  dated  June  26  and  later  printed 
in  Vorwdrts,  stated  that  the  Majority  Socialists  were  ready  to  meet 
with  Allied  representatives  but  saw  "no  cause  to  depart"  from  their 
earlier  declarations  (approved  by  the  party  congress  at  WiJrzburg 
in  August,  191 7)  which,  as  already  pointed  out,  the  Independent 
Social  Democrats  had  denounced  at  Stockholm.  Also,  early  in 
July,  Troelstra  wrote  an  open  letter  to  Henderson  in  Het  Volk, 
which  made  it  clear  that  the  Majority  German  Socialists  were  un- 
prepared to  accept  the  London  memorandum  or  the  neutral  man- 


3i6  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

ifesto  as  the  basis  for  an  inter-belligerent  labor  conference  without 
those  reservations  ^  which  Henderson  scored  at  the  American-Allied 
Labour  and  Socialist  conference  in  mid-September.  It  was  this 
failure  of  the  German  majority  group  to  table  a  satisfactory  reply, 
no  less  than  the  question  of  passports,  that  created  the  "obstacle" 
which  led  Allied  labor  at  London  (Chapter  XXII)  to  pass  its  reso- 
lutions calling  on  the  minority  groups  in  Germany  and  elsewhere  to 
exert  their  pressure  upon  the  German  majority. 

ANSWERS   TO   LABOR'S   DIPLOMACY 

Knowledge  of  the  existence  of  such  groups  and  belief  that  they 
were  increasingly  getting  out  of  hand  gave  the  Allied  labor  leaders 
firmness  in  holding  to  the  inter-belligerent  conference  project  as  a 
fulcrum  for  their  democratic  leverage.  At  a  time  when  even  such 
optimistic  prophets  as  General  Smuts  did  not  see  prospect  of  a  mil- 
itary decision  short  of  another  year,  they  refused  to  abandon  it  in 
the  face  of  government  hostility  that  threatened  to  wreck  the  unity 
of  the  British  labor  movement  on  this  issue. 

But  these  chapters  have  been  seriously  at  fault  if  they  have 
conveyed  the  impression  that  the  Allied  labor  leaders  pinned  their 
hopes  for  results  from  their  "diplomacy  of  democracy"  solely  upon 
a  consultative  conference.  Their  tactics  embraced  first  of  all  that 
massing  of  evidence  as  to  democratic  aims,  of  assurances  as  to  Allied 
labor's  intention  to  stand  out  against  counter  aggression  in  the  event 
of  working  class  insurgency  in  the  Central  Powers,  which  we  have 
interpreted  at  length.  In  August,  the  British  Labour  Party  brought 
out  in  pamphlet  form  the  replies  that  had  been  received  to  date 
from  the  socialist  parties  of  the  Central  Powers.  Those  of  the 
Bulgarian,  Austrian  and  Hungarian  groups  are  of  very  real  signifi- 
cance in  the  light  of  subsequent  events. 

The  reply  of  the  Bulgarian  United  Social  Democratic  Party,  the 
"Broads,"  was  published  in  Narod  in  April  and  May.  They  gave 
their  full  support  to  the 

general  part  of  the  inter-allied  memorandum,  the  league  of  nations, 
disarmament,  arbitration  and  the  peoples'  right  to  settle  their  own 

*  A  dispatch  to  the  London  Times  from  Amsterdam  on  September  i6, 
stated  that  Troelstra  had  been  in  conference  with  Ebert,  chairman  of  the 
German  Majority  Socialists — and  later  head  of  the  socialist  government 
which  succeeded  that  of  Prince  Max — stating  that  the  German  Majority- 
Socialists  accepted  as  a  basis  the  neutral  memorandum  of  the  Dutch- 
Scandinavian  Committee  of  Stockholm,  except  as  regards  compensation  to 
Belgium  (on  which  they  suggested  some  compromise)  and  as  regards 
Alsace-Lorraine   (on  which  they  maintained  their  standpoint). 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  317 

destiny.  This  part  does  not  admit  of  compromise  and,  according  to 
a  declaration  made  by  Henderson,  it  bears  the  character  of  an  ulti- 
matum addressed  to  the  socialists  of  Germany,  Austria-Hungary  and 
Bulgaria.  .  .  . 

One  half  of  the  international  proposes  a  formal  solution  for  a 
common  international  organization  in  the  immediate  future,  and 
gives  concrete  proposals  for  the  future  of  all  countries  and  different 
states. 

The  transmission  of  the  Inter-Allied  memorandum  to  us — the  So- 
cialists of  the  Central  Powers — constitutes  a  remarkable  event  which 
may  have  great  consequences  for  Inter-Socialist  relations. 

In  disagreement,  the  Bulgarians  wanted  to  see  the  rule  of  inter- 
national control  proposed  for  tropical  Africa  adapted  to  all  col- 
onies; the  rule  of  nullification  of  the  Treaty  of  Frankfort  which 
tore  Alsace  and  Lorraine  from  France,  applied  to  treaties  which 
divided  Macedonia  between  Serbia  and  Greece.  They  demanded  for 
its  people  the  right  of  self-determination. 

The  Hungarian  Social  Democratic  Party  ^  declared  that  the 
resolutions  of  the  London  conference  were  "not  opposed"  to  the 
views  it  had  expressed  to  the  Dutch-Scandinavian  Committee  at 
Stockholm: 

The  principal  conditions  we  have  indicated  are : — The  federation 
of  all  nations  in  a  league  of  nations;  the  obtaining  by  all  peoples 
of  the  right  of  self-determination;  international  disarmament;  com- 
pulsory courts  of  arbitration ;  a  peace  without  annexations  or  punitive 
contributions ;  the  recognition  of  the  right  of  free  economic  devel- 
opment for  all  nations,  and  the  incorporation  of  the  social  demands 
of  labor  in  the  peace  treaty. 

We  declared,  in  particular,  in  favor  of  the  restitution  of  Belgium 
and  Serbia,  and  examined  in  detail  the  question  of  indemnities  with 
regard  to  these  two  countries. 

After  reconsidering  our  Stockholm  memorandum,  we  are  bound 
to  declare  that  the  resolutions  of  the  London  Conference  are  not 
opposed  to  our  views. 

It  follows  that  we  consider  the  resolutions  of  the  London  Confer- 
ence, as  well  as  the  results  of  the  Stockholm  discussions,  as  a  suitable 
basis  for  an  immediate  convocation  of  an  international  conference, 
and  we  should  gladly  welcome  such  a  conference.  We  declare  be- 
forehand our  acceptance  of  every  resolution  agreed  upon  by  this 
conference,  and  inspired  by  a  labor  and  socialist  spirit,  and  we  de- 
clare that  we  will  fight  with  all  our  strength  for  the  execution  of 
such  resolutions,  prepared  as  we  are  to  make  the  greatest  sacrifices 
in  order  to  attain  this  end. 

*  The  Hungarian  text  was  a  translation  of  original  documents  handed 
to  Troelstra  by  a  representative  of  the  Hungarian  party,  and  published  in 
Het  Volk,  the  organ  of  the  Dutch  Socialist  Party. 


3i8  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

The  reply  of  the  German  Social  Democratic  Party  of  Austria 
was  published  in  Die  Arbeiter-Zeitung  of  June  28,  19 18.  The 
peace  should  realize,  it  said,  the  following  principles: 

Firstly. — Union  of  all  peoples  in  a  league  of  nations,  which  would 
efifect  international  disarmament,  submit  all  conflicts  between  states 
to  the  decision  of  a  compulsory  arbitration  tribunal,  and  bring  the 
collective  strength  of  the  whole  league  to  bear  on  any  state  which 
transgressed  international  law. 

Secondly. — No  annexations.  The  solution  of  all  territorial  ques- 
tions on  the  basis  of  the  rights  of  peoples  to  dispose  of  themselves. 

Thirdly. — No  indemnities.  Equal  freedom  of  economic  develop- 
ment for  all  peoples  and  the  prevention  of  all  economic  wars. 

Such  a  peace,  in  the  view  of  the  Austrian  Socialists  could  "not 
be  obtained  by  the  victory  of  one  imperialist  group  over  the  other"; 
nor  would  a  "so-called  peace  by  conciliation,  concluded  from  cap- 
italist considerations,  completely  realize  it,"  but  it  might  "consoli- 
date the  democratic,  peaceful  and  socialist  tendencies  in  all  coun- 
tries,"— especially  if  labor  and  socialism  were  to  succeed  by  their 
action  in  bringing  their  governments  to  the  discussion  table,  and 
thus  "appear  to  the  peoples  as  the  peace  bringers,  the  liberators 
from  the  horrors  and  sacrifices  of  war."    Therefore: — 

The  sooner  the  working  classes  in  all  belligerent  countries  decide 
to  exercise  pressure  on  their  governments  in  favor  of  peace,  the 
sooner  will  they  be  able  to  exercise  an  influence  not  only  upon  the 
beginning  of  the  peace  negotiations,  but  also  upon  the  terms  of  peace 
and  the  future  organization  of  mankind. 

Points  in  the  Austrian  reply  of  special  interest  were  these: — 

We  demand  the  transformation  of  Austria-Hungary  into  a  fed- 
eration of  autonomous  states,  and  we  also  demand  the  creation  of  a 
League  of  the   Balkan  peoples. 

We  oppose  all  annexations  by  the  Central  Powers  of  frontier 
peoples  detached  from  Russia.  In  Parliament  and  in  the  press  we 
have  fought  against  the  peace  of  Brest-Litovsk  and  the  peace  of 
Bucharest,  and  when  Parliament  has  to  come  to  a  decision  on  those 
treaties,  we  shall  reject  every  sentence  which  connotes  annexation 
or  violence. 

We  claim,  as  we  have  always  done,  the  reestablishment  and  com- 
pensation of  Belgium.  But  we  do  not  consider  that  the  question  of 
who  is  to  bear  the  expense  of  this  compensation  is  one  of  first-rate 
importance  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  beginning  of  peace  nego- 
tiations. 

Considering  the  immense  sacrifices  of  the  war,  sacrifices  not  only 
in  money  and  goods  but  in  human  life,  we  oppose  any  prolongation 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  319 

of  the  war  on  account  of  disagreements  over  financial  questions.  We 
think  that  there  must  be  a  compromise  on  the  apportionment  of  the 
cost  of  reconstruction  of  the  small  countries. 

With  regard  to  the  questions  of  Alsace-Lorraine,  Italy,  Poland, 
Turkey  and  the  tropical  colonies,  we  are  of  the  opinion  that  an 
absolutely  democratic  peace,  a  peace  consistent  with  the  principles 
of  International  Socialism,  would  settle  these  questions  also  in  the 
spirit  of  the  peoples'  right  of  self-determination.  But  we  are  under 
no  illusions  on  this  point;  we  appreciate  the  fact  that  this  demand 
will  not  be  realized. 

Even  by  the  roundabout  methods  through  which  British  labor 
gained  intelligence  of  the  replies  noted,  nothing  got  through  from 
the  Independent  Social  Democratic  Party  of  Germany.  Its  general 
temper  can  be  indicated  by  some  paragraphs  from  its  earlier  Stock- 
holm memorandum: 

We  demand  the  fullest  freedom  for  international  trade  and  inter- 
course, as  well  as  an  unrestricted  right  of  emigration  and  of  immi- 
gration, with  the  object  of  developing  the  world's  productive  forces 
and  of  bringing  the  peoples  into  closer  touch  with  each  other  and 
multiplying  the  bonds  which  unite  them. 

We  oppose  any  policy  of  economic  isolation  and  any  economic 
struggle  between  states.  AU  disputes  between  states  must  be  settled 
by  international  arbitration.  .  .  . 

In  the  same  way  we  condemn  this  method  of  solving  the  question 
of  Alsace-Lorraine,  and  here  we  are  in  agreement  with  Engels  and 
Jaures.  A  prolongation  of  the  war  on  the  question  of  Alsace-Lor- 
raine now  means  that  the  whole  world,  including  Alsace-Lorraine, 
is  to  be  ravaged  because  of  the  dispute  which  has  arisen  in  regard 
to  the  wishes  of  this  population,  and  that  more  people  will  be  de- 
stroyed on  the  battlefields  than  there  are  inhabitants  in  Alsace-Lor- 
raine. .  .  . 

Complete  political  and  economic  independence  of  Belgium  is  in- 
evitable. In  fulfillment  of  the  solemn  promise  of  the  German  gov- 
ernment at  the  beginning  of  the  war,  the  Belgian  nation  must  obtain 
reparation  for  the  damage  caused  by  the  war,  and  especially  for  the 
economic  loss  which  it  has  sustained. 

Such  reparation  has  nothing  in  common  with  the  war  indemnities, 
which  are  simply  a  plundering  of  the  vanquished  by  the  victor,  and 
which  we  therefore  reject.  .  .  . 

The  drawing  up  of  a  peace  program  is  important,  but  this  pro- 
gram is  nothing  but  smoke  if  it  is  not  supported  by  energetic  interna- 
tional action  on  the  part  of  the  masses. 

We  must  compel  all  the  governments  to  adopt  unconditionally 
this  international  peace  program.  We  must  refuse  credits  to  any 
government  which  rejects  this  program,  replies  evasively  or  does  not 
declare  itself  ready  to  enter  into  peace  negotiations  on  the  basis  of 


320  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

this  program.     Such  a  government  must  be  fought  in  the  most  de- 
cisive manner. 

The  organization  and  prosecution  of  such  common  action  should 
be  the  first  task  of  the  proposed  international  peace  conference.  It 
must  bring  together  all  the  really  Socialist  elements,  determined 
to  work  with  all  their  strength  to  this  end. 

In  the  light  of  the  October  and  November  uprisings,  additional 
paragraphs  in  the  Hungarian  and  Austrian  replies  have  importance. 
They  were  couched  in  terms  of  concerted  international  action;  they 
were  executed  nationally;  that  even  in  July  there  was  prospect  of 
this  was  indicated  by  the  fact  that  these  paragraphs  were  suppressed 
by  the  Hungarian  and  Austrian  censors. 

The  censored  Hungarian  paragraph  read: 

We  consider  it  the  greatest  danger  for  the  whole  future  of  the 
labor  and  socialist  movement  that — putting  aside  all  special  ques- 
tions— we  should  not  now  reach  an  agreement  amongst  labor  and 
socialist  parties  on  this  one  point,  the  necessity  of  bringing  pressure 
on  the  governments  by  common  and  simultaneous  action. 

From  the  movements  conducted  by  the  Hungarian  Party,  during 
the  last  year,  movements  which  found  expression  in  meetings,  dem- 
onstrations, and  general  strikes  in  favor  of  peace,  and  from  the 
influence  exercised  by  these  movments  and  those  of  the  working 
classes  in  Austria  and  Germany,  both  on  each  other  and  the  oppo- 
nents of  the  working  classes,  and  also  from  the  absence  of  strong 
action  in  the  Entente  countries,  we  conclude  that  the  movements  of 
the  working  classes,  who  think  and  feel  internationally,  must  be  the 
consequence  of  an  international  agreement  and  be  directed  inter- 
nationally. Every  other  method,  if  not  a  complete  failure,  would, 
at  the  very  least,  be  followed  by  a  complete  absence  of  results  and 
a  waste  of  working-class  strength. 

The  censored  Austrian  paragraph  read: 

The  most  important  task  of  labor  and  sjcialism  is  rather  to  push 
the  governments  towards  peace  by  taking  strong  action  in  every 
country.  If  this  policy  is  carried  out  continuously  and  with  great 
enough  force  in  the  dififerent  countries,  the  governments  will  be 
obliged  to  take  their  places  at  the  same  table  for  the  purpose  of 
negotiations,  and  will  find  themselves  in  a  compromise  between  their 
respective  demands ;  that  compromise  will  be  the  basis  of  the  peace 
treaty.  The  organization  of  such  work  on  the  part  of  the  working 
classes  of  all  countries  would,  in  our  opinion,  be  the  most  important 
work  of  the  international  conference. 

LABOR    PRESSURE    UPON    THE   ALLIED    GOVERNMENTS 

There  was  yet  another  line  of  pressure  exerted  by  the  Allied 
labor  and  socialist  concert — that  upon  their  own  governments  to 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  321 

parallel  the  joint  labor  formulation  of  war  aims  with  a  joint  gov- 
ernment formulation — both  as  a  democratic  assurance  which  would 
strengthen  unity  at  home,  and  as  a  challenge  to  the  workers  in  the 
Central  Empires  to  bring  pressure  to  bear  upon  their  own  govern- 
ments to  match  it — which  last,  in  the  end,  however  generated  and 
under  the  shadow  of  military  defeat,  broke  through  the  encrustings 
of  German  and  Austrian  imperialism.  For  it  was  this  social  pres- 
sure upon  the  governments,  not  to  stop  the  war  but  to  lay  down  the 
basis  for  a  democratic  peace;  not  to  bargain,  but  to  lay  down  the 
principles  which  should  be  compromised  in  neither  war  nor  peace, 
that  was  the  motivation  of  the  controlling  majority  Allied  labor 
groups.  We  have  followed  their  expression  of  it  through  these 
pages. 

At  its  meeting  in  September  (1918),  the  Inter-Allied  Labour 
and  Socialist  Conference  in  London  approved  the  stand  of  President 
Wilson  in  rejecting  the  Austrian  note  on  the  ground  that  it  pro- 
posed a  secret  conference  and  that  the  government  of  the  United 
States  had  "clearly  and  publicly  formulated  its  own  war  aims."  It 
then  turned  round  and  challenged  the  Allied  governments,  whatever 
their  earlier  commitments  to  each  other,  formally  to 

subscribe  to  the  fourteen  points  formulated  by  President  Wilson, 
thus  adopting  a  policy  of  clearness  and  moderation  as  opposed  to  a 
policy  dictated  exclusively  by  changes  in  the  war  map.  .  .  . 

It  is  by  defining  their  own  war  aims  jointly  with  the  United 
States,  with  the  same  precision  and  clearness,  that  the  Allied  govern- 
ments will  give  to  the  workers  of  the  world  the  conviction  they  are 
resolved  to  continue  the  struggle  not  in  order  to  meet  the  aggression 
of  the  central  monarchies  by  undertaking  in  their  turn  a  war  of 
conquest,  but  for  the  single  purpose  of  establishing  on  an  unassail- 
able foundation  a  peace  which  will  be  just  and  lasting,  and  in  con- 
formity with  the  aspirations  of  international  democracy. 

Clearly  it  was  to  this  Allied  labor  resolution  that,  a  week  later, 
the  President  in  his  September  27  address  replied: — 

As  I  have  said,  neither  I  nor  any  other  man  in  governmental 
authority  created  or  gave  form  to  the  issues  of  this  war.  I  have 
simply  responded  to  them  with  such  vision  as  I  could  command.  But 
I  have  responded  gladly  and  with  a  resolution  that  has  grown  warmer 
and  more  confident  as  the  issues  have  grown  clearer  and  clearer.  It 
is  now  plain  that  they  are  issues  which  no  man  can  pervert  unless 
it  be  willfully.  I  am  bound  to  fight  for  them,  and  happy  to  fight  for 
them  as  time  and  circumstance  have  revealed  them  to  me  as  to  all 
the  world.  Our  enthusiasm  for  them  grows  more  and  more  irre- 
sistible as  they  stand  out  in  more  and  more  vivid  and  unmistakable 
outline. 


322  JHE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

And  the  forces  that  fight  for  them  draw  into  closer  and  closer 
array,  organize  their  millions  into  more  and  more  unconquerable 
might,  as  they  become  more  and  more  distinct  to  the  thought  and 
purpose  of  the  peoples  engaged.  It  is  the  peculiarity  of  this  great 
war  that  while  statesmen  have  seemed  to  cast  about  for  definitions 
of  their  purpose  and  have  sometimes  seemed  to  shift  their  ground 
and  their  point  of  view,  the  thought  of  the  mass  of  men,  whom 
statesmen  are  supposed  to  instruct  and  lead,  has  grown  more  and 
more  unclouded,  more  and  more  certain  of  what  it  is  that  they  are 
fighting  for.  National  purposes  have  fallen  more  and  more  into 
the  background  and  the  common  purpose  of  enlightened  mankind  has 
taken  their  place.  The  counsels  of  plain  men  have  become  on  all 
hands  more  simple  and  straightforward  and  more  unified  than  the 
counsels  of  sophisticated  men  of  affairs,  who  still  retain  the  impres- 
sion that  they  are  playing  a  game  of  power  and  playing  for  high 
stakes.  That  is  why  I  have  said  that  this  is  a  peoples'  war,  not  a 
statesmen's.  Statesmen  must  follow  the  clarified  common  thought 
or  be  broken. 

I  take  that  to  be  the  significance  of  the  fact  that  assemblies  and 
associations  of  many  kinds  made  up  of  plain  workaday  people  have 
demanded,  almost  every  time  they  came  together,  and  are  still  de- 
manding, that  the  leaders  of  their  governments  declare  to  them 
plainly  what  it  is,  exactly  what  it  is,  that  they  are  seeking  in  this 
war,  and  what  they  think  the  items  of  the  final  settlement  should  be. 
They  are  not  yet  satisfied  with  what  they  have  been  told.  They 
still  seem  to  fear  that  they  are  getting  what  they  ask  for  only  in 
statesmen's  terms, — only  in  the  terms  of  territorial  arrangements 
and  divisions  of  power,  and  not  in  terms  of  broad-visioned  justice 
and  mercy  and  peace  and  the  satisfaction  of  those  deep-seated  long- 
ings of  oppressed  and  distracted  men  and  women  and  enslaved  peo- 
ples that  seem  to  them  the  only  things  worth  fighting  a  war  for  that 
engulfs  the  world.  Perhaps  statesmen  have  not  always  recognized 
this  changed  aspect  of  the  whole  world  of  policy  and  action.  Per- 
haps they  have  not  always  spoken  in  direct  reply  to  the  questions 
asked  because  they  did  not  know  how  searching  those  questions  were 
and  what  sort  of  answers  they  demanded. 

But  I,  for  one,  am  glad  to  attempt  the  answer  again  and  again, 
in  the  hope  that  I  may  make  it  clearer  and  clearer  that  my  one 
thought  is  to  satisfy  those  who  struggle  in  the  ranks  and  are,  perhaps 
above  all  others,  entitled  to  a  reply  whose  meaning  no  one  can  have 
any  excuse  for  misunderstanding,  if  he  understands  the  language  in 
which  it  is  spoken  or  can  get  some  one  to  translate  it  correctly  into 
his  own.  .  .  . 

FRUITS  OF  THE  CIVIL  OFFENSIVE 

Balked  by  the  German  majority  Socialists  in  their  inter-belliger- 
ent conference  project,  and  balked  at  home  in  their  efforts  to  get  a 
joint  statement  of  war  aims  from  the  Allied  governments,  the  Allied 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  323 

workers  kept  their  own  blade  of  labor  diplomacy  in  hand  but  stood 
ready  to  sustain  the  American  President  in  his  civil  offensive;  just 
as  they  continued  to  stand  ready  to  back  up  their  own  armies  in 
the  military  offensive  so  long  as  the  threat  of  German  militarism 
hung  over  Europe. 

As  in  the  case  of  the  military  command,  the  caliber  of  this  moral 
and  political  drive  depended  upon  unity.  We  have  seen  that,  while 
neither  the  President  nor  Allied  labor  had  succeeded  in  drawing  out 
the  Allied  governments  as  a  whole,  British  labor  had  elicited  a  state- 
ment from  the  Premier  in  December,  19 17,  which  was  fairly  parallel 
to  its  own,  and  that  Lloyd  George  in  Paris  in  July,  19 18,  stated 
that  the  Germans  could  have  peace  to-morrow  if  they  would  accept 
it  on  Wilson's  terms — a  statement  which  was  paralleled  by  General 
Smuts  in  September.  We  have  seen  that  it  was  this  knowledge 
which  made  it  tenable  for  such  a  labor  leader  as  Clynes,  the  food 
controller,  to  remain  in  the  government.  With  then,  the  American 
President,  members  of  the  British  cabinet,  liberals  in  France  and 
England,  Allied  socialist  and  labor  bodies,  we  had  a  new,  if  frag- 
mentary, western  front  of  diplomacy. 

It  is  of  course  altogether  clear  that  this  civil  offensive  alone 
would  not  have  produced  the  quick  about-face  in  October  on  the 
part  of  Germany.  So  long  as  the  army  was  gaining,  the  pan-Ger- 
mans were  in  the  saddle.  The  answer  to  them  was  force — force  to 
the  uttermost.  It  meant  death  and  struggle  and  courage  unstinted, 
poured  into  the  military  offensive.  But  it  is  doubtful  if  the  recoil 
of  the  German  armies,  even  if  supplies  and  men  were  in  parlous 
jeopardy  on  French  soil,  would  have  led  to  such  a  quick  abandon- 
ment of  the  program  of  conquest,  had  it  not  been  for  the  insur- 
gent civilian  forces  which  had  been  released  by  the  new  statesman- 
ship of  the  West.  As  General  Maurice  pointed  out,  probably  never 
before  in  history  had  a  nation  admitted  defeat  with  its  armies  still 
far  in  enemy  territory. 

First  to  be  reckoned  with  was  the  consummate  ability  of  Foch, 
Dias,  Petain,  Haig,  Pershing  and  their  lieutenants,  the  tremendous 
impact  of  valor  and  metal  with  which  they  battered  through  the 
Hindenburg  line.  But  there  were  other  forces  at  work.  There  was 
the  silent  pressure  of  the  British  fleet  and  the  sapping  of  under- 
nourishment. There  was  the  incalculable  mining  of  Bolshevism, 
however  despised  in  the  Allied  capitals.  The  prospect  of  250,000 
fresh  American  troops  a  month  and  ultimate  defeat  entered  in;  and 
also,  the  prospect  of  an  American  settlement.  In  the  rapid  exchange 
of  notes,  the  superiority  of  the  new  tactics  to  the  old  seems  incon- 
trovertible. Every  fuming  of  fresh  reprisals,  of  annihilation  and 
counter-conquest,  on  the  part  of  Allied  statesmen  had  thrown  Ger- 


324  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

man  liberals  into  the  hands  of  the  old  order.  But  President  Wil- 
son's insistence  upon  a  convincing  exhibit  of  popular  control  as  a 
precedent  to  peace  could  not  permanently  be  turned  by  the  Pan- 
Germans  to  their  advantage;  his  demand  for  more  and  more  power 
in  the  hands  of  the  German  democracy  was  a  demand  not  for  their 
annihilation  but  for  their  deliverance.  To  their  reenforcement,  also, 
was  his  inescapable  citation  of  fresh  U-boat  activities  and  the  abuse 
of  civilians  in  the  course  of  the  retreat  in  France,  as  a  test  of  their 
sincerity  and  of  their  ability  to  hold  the  powers  of  ruthlessness  in 
leash.  For  the  President  to  have  refused  to  deal  with  the  German 
people  on  the  terms  he  had  set  would  have  exploded  his  whole 
statesmanship;  to  be  Scotch-Irish  canny  to  the  tips  of  his  fingers 
in  making  sure  that  he  was  dealing  with  the  people  and  on  those 
terms,  was  a  different  matter. 

When  a  ridge  or  a  U-boat  base  had  been  taken,  a  trench  line 
broken  through  or  a  transportation  junction  captured,  it  was  fairly 
easy  to  gauge  the  military  gain;  even  the  civilian  felt  he  had  some 
measure  for  judgment.  But  to  judge  the  gain  of  a  diplomatic  offen- 
sive was  a  new  problem ;  the  results  were  less  tangible,  the  assurances 
less  accepted. 

We  no  longer  think  in  terms  of  hostages,  sacked  cities,  enslaved 
prisoners,  as  tokens  of  security.  But  we  cling  to  notions  of  invaded 
capitals  and  punitive  war  indemnities — such  as  rankled  for  forty 
years  in  the  heart  of  France.  Whatever  the  President's  course  with 
respect  to  the  German  overtures,  it  was  to  be  expected  that  those 
who  believed  in  these  things,  those  who  had  had  no  understanding 
of  his  paralleling  political  offensive,  those  who  had  had  no  sympathy 
for  his  proposal  of  a  league  of  nations  as  the  keystone  to  a  world 
safe  for  democracy,  those  who  saw  the  only  security  for  the  future 
in  reliance  on  individual  national  might  buttressed  by  economic  bar- 
riers, competitive  armaments  and  universal  military  establishments 
— or  in  fighting  alliances  of  such  nations — would  attack  his  course. 

But  the  President  weighed  other  things  than  these  attacks.  He 
saw  only  less  security  in  a  whipped  militarism,  bound  and  gagged 
and  biding  its  time,  than  he  saw  in  an  unrepentant  militarism 
couched  for  a  breathing  spell  behind  a  false  front  of  reform. 

In  his  reply,  he  gave  weight  first  to  the  tangible  military  secur- 
ities which  the  Allied  command  under  Foch  would  define  against 
any  throwback  of  the  German  military  machine  a  month  hence  or 
a  decade  hence.  There  was  to  be  no  risking  safety  there.  He  would 
not  discard  the  military  procedure  for  the  political  until  the  ends 
he  sought  were  fully  assured.  He  did  not  discard  political  procedure 
for  the  military  merely  because  the  ends  seemed  to  be  in  sight. 
When  it  came  to  the  less  tangible  political  securities,  he  gave  less 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  325 

weight  to  the  weakening  of  German  morale  than  to  the  emergence 
of  a  new  common  purpose — the  exact  extent  of  the  democratic 
forces  which  seemingly  had  asserted  themselves,  their  ability  to 
continue  to  do  so,  their  durable  superimposition  upon  the  old  dynas- 
tic, arbitrary,  imperialistic  scheme  of  control  which  had  held  them 
down  and  threatened  all  Europe.  Rather  he  saw  security  in  a  new 
constitution  of  Germany,  grounded  at  home  in  responsibihty  to  the 
people,  and  held  in  a  compact  of  free  nations. 

British  labor  saw  and  understood  and  upheld  his  course — in  its 
uncertain  beginnings  no  less  than  in  its  masterful  culmination;  reg- 
istering its  support  at  a  time  when  the  course  the  President  took  was 
violently  attacked  in  many  quarters  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic.^ 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the  Trades 
Union  Congress  and  the  National  Executive  of  the  Labour  Party  on 
October  9  [1918]  British  labor  issued  a  joint  statement  which  said: 

The  new  peace  offer  from  the  government  of  the  Central  Empires 
creates  a  situation  full  of  possibilities  which  the  Allied  peoples  and 
governments  cannot  afford  to  ignore.  The  German  proposal  is  made 
by  a  government  which  includes  representatives  of  the  majority 
parties  in  the  Reichstag.  We  are,  therefore,  of  the  opinion  that  the 
offer  is  entitled  to  receive  reasoned  consideration. 

We  frankly  recognize  that  a  further  elucidation  of  these  pro- 
posals is  absolutely  necessary  before  the  military  effort  of  the  Allies 
can  be  checked.  As  an  essential  preliminary  the  Central  Powers 
must  withdraw  their  armies  from  all  the  occupied  territory,  and  give 
a  public  and  unequivocal  declaration  of  their  willingness  to  apply  the 
principles  formulated  by  President  Wilson  honestly  and  unreservedly 
to  every  question  to  be  dealt  with  in  the  final  settlement.  Only  by 
such  preliminary  measures,  applying  these  principles,  in  President 
Wilson's  words,  "to  substantive  items  which  must  constitute  the  body 
of  any  final  settlement,"  can  we  have  confidence  in  their  will  to 
peace  and  obtain  the  necessary  guarantees  that  every  issue  raised  at 
the  peace  conference  will  be  discussed  as  a  matter  of  justice  and 
international  right,  rather  than  as  a  matter  for  bargain  and  com- 
promise between  the  several  states. 

At  the  same  time  we  urge  the  Allied  governments  to  declare 
publicly  and  collectively  that  an  unqualified  acceptance  of  President 
Wilson's  conditions,  including  the  league  of  nations,  would  be  the 
beginning  of  official  negotiations  for  a  general  peace.  We  should 
thus  have  a  joint  definition  of  purpose  and  of  agreement  upon  the 
basis  of  peace,  which  would  make  fruitful  discussion  possible.  We 
hold,  with  the  President  of  the  United  States,  that  such  definition 
and  agreement  form  an  essential  preliminary  of  negotiations  between 

^Samuel  Gompers  sent  a  public  cable  from  Italy  (October,  1918),  as  out 
of  joint  with  the  President's  procedure  as  his  earlier  utterances  had  been 
out  of  joint  with  that  of  British  labor. 


326  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

the  warring  governments.  We  share  his  view  that  the  method  of 
approach  to  the  final  settlement  cannot  be  that  of  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  where  the  diplomatists  secretly  carved  up  the  various  coun- 
tries without  reference  either  to  the  desires  of  the  inhabitants  or  to 
the  will  of  the  nations  for  which  they  professed  to  act. 

The  people  have  endured  their  grievous  sufferings  and  borne 
their  heavy  burdens  in  the  hope  that  the  final  settlement  will  be 
enduring  peace  and  security  for  mankind.  Within  the  framework 
of  the  war  aims  of  the  organized  workers  of  the  Allied  nations,  and 
the  program  of  President  Wilson,  we  believe  such  a  peace  can  be 
erected  upon  a  foundation  of  the  self-determination  of  peoples.  This 
principle  must  govern  the  discussion  of  every  question  of  a  terri- 
torial and  political  character  dealt  with  at  the  peace  conference.  To 
ignore  it  can  only  result  in  an  unprincipled  compromise.  Our  gen- 
eration has  been  paying  a  heavy  penalty  because  this  principle  has 
been  violated  or  ignored  in  the  peace  settlements  that  have  followed 
previous  European  wars.  The  present  world  struggle  has  resulted 
mainly  from  such  violation  of  the  right  of  small  nations  and  of 
nationalities  that  have  hitherto  lacked  cohesion  and  force  to  estab- 
lish their  claim  to  live  under  forms  of  government  of  their  own 
choosing. 

As  representatives  of  the  organized  workers,  we  call  upon  the 
government  to  explore  this  new  avenue  open  to  peace  with  a  single 
desire  to  ascertain  whether  it  leads  to  the  new  international  order 
and  the  general  peace  we  can  all  unite  to  cherish  and  protect. 


THE   OLD   ORDER   AND   THE   NEW 

Throughout  the  months  of  191 7  and  19 18,  when  the  American 
President  was  slowly  enunciating  the  elements  of  what  throughout 
Western  Europe  came  to  be  known  as  the  "Wilson  policies" — the 
broad  principles  of  a  society  of  nations  as  against  the  old  balance 
of  power  and  war  system,  the  projection  of  a  new  era  of  inter- 
national cooperation  built  on  respect  for  nationality  and  the  self- 
determination  of  peoples — the  Pan-Germans  were  in  full  cry  for  the 
old  order  of  individual  might  ruthlessly  to  be  applied  by  them. 
They  lost.  But  so  long  as  their  armies  were  successful  in  the  field, 
the  liberal  forces  within  the  Empires  exhibited  helplessness. 

With  the  change  in  the  tide  of  battle,  the  democracy  of  the 
democratic  nations  came  to  the  test.  They  had  proved  their  ability 
to  challenge,  check  and  turn  back  the  supreme  embodiment  of  dynas- 
tic ambition  and  commercial  imperialism  working  through  the  ma- 
chinery of  militarism  and  autocracy.  Would  they,  with  German 
imperialism  beaten,  lay  the  fabric  of  a  new  era  that  should  make 
the  war  seem  worth  its  cost  to  the  millions  of  families  whose  men 
had  gone  down  in  it? 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  327 

Throughout  the  months  of  19 17  and  19 18  when  not  only  the 
American  President,  but  British  and  Allied  labor,  were  slowly  enun- 
ciating their  democratic  scheme,  the  older  diplomacy  pitted  against 
the  Pan-Germans  did  not  drop  out  of  existence.  What  of  the  old 
commitments  among  the  Allies  to  Italy,  for  example?  They  had 
never  been  officially  waived.  The  division  of  Turkey  as  a  field  for 
national  economic  exploitation  (as  expressed  in  the  secret  treaties) 
had  never  been  wholly  abandoned  in  favor  of  autonomy  for  its 
several  parts  under  international  supervision;  there  had  never  been 
a  complete  disclaimer  by  any  means  of  the  Paris  economic  agree- 
ment; the  agitation  for  a  three-decker  preferential  tariff  in  the 
British  empire — colonies  first.  Allies  second,  enemies  third — had 
never  been  abandoned.  The  Sailor's  Union  and  their  propaganda  of 
a  5-year  boycott  was  in  a  sense  but  the  personification  of  an  eco- 
nomic war  after  the  war. 

With  the  Allied  armies  forging  ahead  on  the  western  front,  these 
old  desires  iiamed  up,  disclosing  particularly  lively  embers.  The 
speech-making  of  Premier  Hughes,  of  Australia,  at  the  Derby  con- 
ference of  the  British  Trades  Union  Congress  was  an  effort  under 
the  guise  of  patriotism  to  dislodge  the  Labour  Party  as  an  obstruc- 
tion to  the  sweep  of  powerful  interests  in  the  economic  life. 

Four  if  not  five  of  the  points  made  seriatim  by  the  President  in 
his  September  27  address  were  directed  at  forces  within  the  Allies — 
curbs  against  those  things  which  to  his  mind  would  render  a  league 
of  free  nations  impossible  and  go  back  to  the  old,  insecure,  burden- 
some, antagonistic  scheme  of  things  before  the  war.  There  was  no 
mistaking  his  meaning  when  he  said: 

It  is  of  capital  importance  that  we  should  also  be  explicitly  agreed 
that  no  peace  shall  be  obtained  by  any  kind  of  compromise  or  abate- 
ment of  the  principles  we  have  avowed  as  the  principles  for  which 
we  are  fighting.  There  should  exist  no  doubt  about  that.  I  am, 
therefore,  going  to  take  the  liberty  of  speaking  with  the  utmost 
frankness  about  the  practical  implications  that  are  involved  in  it. 

If  it  be  indeed  and  in  truth  the  common  object  of  the  Govern- 
ments associated  against  Germany  and  of  the  nations  whom  they 
govern,  as  I  believe  it  to  be,  to  achieve  by  the  coming  settlements  a 
secure  and  lasting  peace,  it  will  be  necessary  that  all  who  sit  down 
at  the  peace  table  shall  come  ready  and  willing  to  pay  the  price, 
the  only  price,  that  will  procure  it ;  and  ready  and  willing,  also,  to 
create  in  some  virile  fashion  the  only  instrumentality  by  which  it 
can  be  made  certain  that  the  agreements  of  the  peace  will  be  hon- 
ored and  fulfilled. 

That  price  is  impartial  justice  in  every  item  of  the  settlement, 
no  matter  whose  interest  is  crossed;  and  not  only  impartial  justice, 
but  also  the  satisfaction  of  the  several  peoples  whose  fortunes  are 


328  THE  NEW  ALIGNMENT 

dealt  with.  That  indispensable  instrumentality  is  a  League  of  Na- 
tions formed  under  covenants  that  will  be  efficacious.  Without  such 
an  instrumentality,  by  which  the  peace  of  the  world  can  be  guar- 
anteed, peace  will  rest  in  part  upon  the  word  of  outlaws,  and  only 
upon  that  word.  For  Germany  will  have  to  redeem  her  character, 
not  by  what  happens  at  the  peace  table  but  by  what  follows. 

And,  as  I  see  it,  the  constitution  of  that  League  of  Nations  and 
the  clear  definition  of  its  objects  must  be  a  part,  is  in  a  sense  the 
most  essential  part,  of  the  peace  settlement  itself.  It  cannot  be 
formed  now.  If  formed  now,  it  would  be  merely  a  new  alliance 
confined  to  the  nations  associated  against  a  common  enemy.  It  is 
not  likely  that  it  could  be  formed  after  the  settlement.  It  is  neces- 
sary to  guarantee  the  peace ;  and  the  peace  cannot  be  guaranteed  as 
an  afterthought.  The  reason,  to  speak  in  plain  terms  again,  why  it 
must  be  guaranteed  is  that  there  will  be  parties  to  the  peace  whose 
promises  have  proved  untrustworthy,  and  means  must  be  found  in 
connection  with  the  peace  settlement  itself  to  remove  that  source  of 
insecurity.  It  would  be  folly  to  leave  the  guarantee  to  the  subse- 
quent voluntary  action  of  the  Governments  we  have  seen  destroy 
Russia  and  deceive  Rumania. 

But  these  general  terms  do  not  disclose  the  whole  matter.  Some 
details  are  needed  to  make  them  sound  less  like  a  thesis  and  more 
like  a  practical  program.  These,  then,  are  some  of  the  partic- 
ulars, and  I  state  them  with  the  greater  confidence  because  I  can 
state  them  authoritatively  as  representing  this  government's  inter- 
pretation of  its  own  duty  with  regard  to  peace : 

First,  the  impartial  justice  meted  out  must  involve  no  discrim- 
ination between  those  to  whom  we  wish  to  be  just  and  those  to  whom 
we  do  not  wish  to  be  just.  It  must  be  a  justice  that  plays  no 
favorites  and  knows  no  standard  but  the  equal  rights  of  the  several 
peoples  concerned ; 

Second,  no  special  or  separate  interest  of  any  single  nation  or 
any  group  of  nations  can  be  made  the  basis  of  any  part  of  the  settle- 
ment which  is  not  consistent  with  the  common  interest  of  all ; 

Third,  there  can  be  no  leagues  or  alliances  or  special  covenants 
and  understandings  within  the  general  and  common  family  of  the 
League  of  Nations; 

Fourth,  and  more  specifically,  there  can  be  no  special,  selfish 
economic  combinations  within  the  league  and  no  employment  of  any 
form  of  economic  boycott  or  exclusion  except  as  the  power  of 
economic  penalty  by  exclusion  from  the  markets  of  the  world  may 
be  vested  in  the  League  of  Nations  itself  as  a  means  of  discipline 
and  control ; 

Fifth,  all  international  agreements  and  treaties  of  every  kind 
must  be  made  known  in  their  entirety  to  the  rest  of  the  world. 

Special  alliances  and  economic  rivalries  and  hostilities  have  been 
the  prolific  source  in  the  modern  world  of  the  plans  and  passions  that 
produce  war.  It  would  be  an  insincere  as  well  as  an  insecure  peace 
that  did  not  exclude  them  in  definite  and  binding  terras. 


DEMOCRACY  COMES  TO  THE  TEST  329 

The  President  had  made  himself  the  spokesman  for  the  plain 
people  of  the  Allied  nations — people  who  had  borne  the  heavy  load 
of  mihtary  resistance  and  who  had  hailed  the  new  diplomacy — peo- 
ple who  were  not  wedded  to  the  old  fetiches  of  conquest  and  who 
were  fired  by  his  vision  of  a  new  day.  They  were  to  reveal  their 
support  in  demonstrations  and  mass  meetings  on  his  coming  to 
France  and  England  and  Italy  and  he  was  to  reach  out  to  them, 
across  official  barriers,  in  utterances  which  served  notice  of  their 
common  aims.  They  were  in  turn  to  serve  notice  of  their  stub- 
born determination  to  "carry  on"  for  a  democratic  international 
order,  should  one  and  all  the  statesmen  fail  at  Versailles — in  the 
resolutions  passed  on  at  the  international  labor  and  socialist  con- 
ferences which  were  at  length  convened  at  Berne  in  February,  19 19, 
and  which  demanded  a  council  of  representatives  of  peoples  rather 
than  of  governments  as  basic  to  a  league  of  nations,  and  common 
control  over  the  machinery  of  war  as  essential  to  a  "clean  and 
lasting  peace." 

The  constitution  of  a  world  was  at  stake — in  the  settlement  and 
in  the  years  succeeding;  and  only  the  long  range  view  of  history 
will  show  how  much,  in  the  molding  of  that  constitution,  will  be 
found  to  have  been  due  to  the  building  up  in  Western  Europe,  in 
the  midst  of  the  mistrust  and  bitterness  of  war,  of  a  body  of  work- 
ers, British,  French,  Belgian,  and  Italian,  socialist  and  trade  union 
alike,  whose  dominant,  organized  power  was  neighbor  to  the  Allied 
war  chancellories  and  was  a  power  for  good;  how  much  to  the  fact 
that  their  new  and  robust  presence  had  come  among  the  beribboned 
figures  of  diplomacy. 


PART  IV 
WORKERS'  CONTROL 


CHAPTER   XXIV 

TOWARDS   DEMOCRACY   IN   RECONSTRUCTION 

We  have  followed  the  course  of  British  labor  in  the  war  to  the 
armistice  upon  the  battlefields  and  the  gathering  of  the  nations  at 
Versailles,  to  the  British  elections  and  the  break  with  the  war  coali- 
tion, to  the  transition  from  war  work  to  reconstruction. 

The  peace  begins  another  epoch.  The  war  witnessed  the  crash- 
ing down  of  the  superstructures  of  the  old.  In  the  midst  of  it  were 
laid  the  foundations  of  the  new.  Just  as  we  as  a  nation  shared  only 
briefly  and  at  the  close  in  the  inexorable  strain  of  the  conflict  which 
reached  from  the  grinding  surfaces  of  the  trenches  far  back  to 
every  rivet  and  strut  of  the  social  order,  so  we  are  less  conscious  of 
recoils  which  affect  the  whole  fabric  of  European  civilization  now 
that  the  tension  is  removed.  The  changes  while  the  war  was  on 
must  needs  have  been  momentous  if  we  recognize  its  outcome  as 
in  great  measure  due,  on  the  one  hand,  to  the  failure  of  centralized 
Prussian  autocracy  to  carry  enduring  conviction  among  its  coerced 
populations  and,  on  the  other  hand,  to  the  latent  power  for  con- 
certed action  among  a  loosely  hung  group  of  freer,  self-willed  peo- 
ples. These  efforts  of  two  conflicting  schemes  of  political  govern- 
ment, each  to  hold  its  own  vantage  ground  and  to  match  the  special 
quality  which  its  opponent  possessed  at  the  start,  could  not  fail  to 
provoke  profound  reactions  on  either  hand.  The  swing  toward  re- 
publicanism, revolution  and  liberty  in  Germany  and  Austria-Hun- 
gary once  the  war  was  over  predicates  shiftings  towards  collectivism 
among  the  Allies,  as  far  reaching  if  not  so  swift,  and  as  fundamental, 
if  not  in  kind. 

But  more,  we  have  been  party  to  a  struggle  of  endurance  not 
between  two  opposed  mechanisms,  but  between  great  groups  of 
sentient  human  beings — to  whose  slow  onward  march  the  war  was, 
at  the  start,  an  imperious  interruption  and,  at  the  close,  a  great 
deliverance  for  democracy  with  its  free  choices  and  its  blendings 
between  old  and  new. 

In  a  time  of  change,  certain  master  ideas  ride  a  population  and 
carry  it  far.     Prince  Kropotkin  has  said: — 

There  are  moments  in  the  life  of  mankind  when  certain  general 
ideas  prepared  by  a  slow  evolution  of  the  mind  get  hold  with  an 

333 


334  CONCLUSION 

unprecedented  clearness  of  the  great  masses  of  man.    Such  a  moment 

takes  place  now. 

The  danger  is  that  one  shall  write  cautiously  and  seek  to  translate 
revolutionary  force  into  terms  of  moderate  social  reform.  To  write 
tamely  of  great  changes  in  prospect  is  as  misleading  as  to  write 
extravagantly  of  little  ones  achieved.  Balanced  and  temperate  state- 
ments of  the  coming  reconstruction  will  not  suffice  to  render  the 
radical  alteration  which  British  labor  demands.  Labor  feels  that 
something  prophetic  is  needed.  From  the  ground  up  the  remaking 
must  be  done.  Europe  is  in  ruins  and  cannot  be  tinkered.  A 
restoration  of  the  old  society,  with  its  institutions  just  as  they  stood 
before  the  war,  is  clearly  impossible.  That  which  has  got  into  the 
minds  of  the  people  is  that  conscious  control  of  life  is  possible. 

Our  chapters  have  been  concerned  primarily  with  the  months  of 
1918  in  which  British  labor  laid  the  political  and  economic  macadam 
of  its  new  street  of  to-morrow.  We  have  retraced  the  crossways 
that  led  up  to  it  through  the  earlier  years  of  the  war  and  seen  them 
reaching  back  to  the  long  rough  cobbled  road  which  a  vast  and 
vaster  company  of  men  and  women  have  paced  since  the  industrial 
revolution  brought  into  being  a  new  estate  in  Western  Europe — 
made  up  of  wage  earners. 

We  have  endeavored  to  sketch  in  broad  outline  three  manifesta- 
tions of  the  British  labor  movement  in  the  midst  of  the  war.  They 
are  all  in  the  direction  of  an  expansion  of  democracy — of  the  work- 
er's say  in  the  governance  of  his  work  and  of  his  nation  and  of 
the  world. 

The  modern  industrial  movement  in  Western  Europe,  the  move- 
ment of  the  organized  workers  in  trade  unions,  concerns  itself  with 
the  organization  of  producers.  Its  area  is  the  day's  work.  It 
begins  with  wages  and  hours,  but  it  reaches  out  to  a  share  in  manage- 
ment. It  claims  that  the  producer  must  control  production.  It 
forecasts  workers'  control  of  industry:  self-government  in  industry. 
It  expressed  itself  afresh  in  wartime  England  in  the  shop  stewards' 
committees,  the  spread  of  industrial  unionism,  the  Triple  Alliance, 
and  the  joint  boards.  Its  extreme  statement  (which  will  not  find 
acceptance  in  Great  Britain)  is  French  and  Italian  syndicalism, 
which  would  brush  aside  the  state  and  conceivably  might  end  in  a 
tyranny  of  the  strongest  industrial  group,  or  in  an  anarchy  of  con- 
tending trades. 

The  modern  political  movement  of  labor  in  Western  Europe 
concerns  itself  with  the  organization  of  voters.  It  functions  through 
parliaments  and  local  councils  and  boards.  It  deals  primarily  with 
man,  the  consumer,  rather  than  with  man,  the  producer.    It  there- 


TOWARDS  DEMOCRACY  IN  RECONSTRUCTION    335 

fore  is  a  territorial-geographical  association  (instead  of  a  workshop 
association).  The  members  of  the  association  live  together  (in  the 
industrial  association  they  work  together).  The  political  movement 
concerns  itself  with  nationalization  of  the  means  of  production,  the 
division  of  the  national  product  and  the  distribution  of  wealth.  Its 
extreme  statement  (which  will  not  find  acceptance  in  Great  Britain) 
is  German  state  socialism  which  conceivably  might  stifle  freedom  in 
centralized   organization. 

The  British  labor  movement,  driven  on  by  the  industrial  impulse 
and  the  political  impulse,  alike,  tends,  in  the  phrase  of  the  labor 
press,  toward  "ownership  by  the  state  and  management  by  the 
workers." 

For  the  political  impulse  toward  collectivism,  the  Labour  Party 
is  the  custodian.  Arthur  Henderson  is  its  engineer  and  Sidney 
Webb  one  of  its  interpreters.  Webb  not  only  gave  constructive 
craftsmanship  to  the  formulation  of  labor's  foreign  policies,  but 
with  Snowden — at  the  opposite  pole  on  the  war  issue — fashioned 
its  proposals  for  radical  fiscal  changes.  But  in  the  domestic  field, 
while  the  reconstruction  plan  of  the  Labour  Party  is  detailed  and 
specific  in  its  outline  of  legislative  minima  as  protection  against 
industrial  abuses,  it  is  all  but  bare  of  reference  to  the  structure  of 
industrial  self-defense  and  self-government,  shop  by  shop,  district 
by  district,  industry  by  industry,  to  the  same  end. 

Sidney  Webb  is,  in  truth,  making  a  last  stand  fight  for  the 
classic  interpretation  of  industrial  democracy,  where  the  political 
state  was  to  be  sovereign,  owning  and  conducting  the  forces  of 
production,  and  where  the  unions  were  to  be  juniors  in  the  presence 
of  the  bearded  scientific  expert.  He  tends  to  discount  the  new 
impulse  toward  workers'  control  in  which  the  main  drive  is  that 
labor  is  not  to  be  a  subordinate,  but  a  partner.  On  the  other  hand, 
organized  labor  has  come,  as  result  of  the  tribunals  set  up  by  the 
war,  to  appreciate  the  value  to  itself  of  scientific  method.  In  these 
tribunals  the  workers  often  found  that  they  knew  only  the  facts 
of  their  own  shops  or  districts  and  turned  increasingly  to  such 
authorities  as  Webb  for  the  wider  view. 

For  the  industrial  impulse  toward  producers'  control  in  industry, 
there  is  at  present  no  one  custodian.  In  its  local  manifestations,  the 
shop  stewards  are  forerunners,  and  in  the  words  of  one  of  the 
leading  labor  executives  of  England — himself  a  member  of  a  gov- 
ernment tribunal — if  a  John  the  Baptist  rose  up  among  them  they 
would  sweep  England.  In  the  national  manifestations  of  producers' 
control,  Robert  Smillie  (of  the  miners),  J.  H.  Thomas  (of  the 
railwaymen)  and  other  industrial  unionists  are  leaders;  A.  R.  Orage, 
S.  G.  Hobson,  G.  D.  H.  Cole  and  others  are  its  intellectual  inter- 


336  CONCLUSION 

preters.  These  last  have  no  direct  immediate  "following"  of  votes, 
but  their  ideas  are  helping  to  swing  the  labor  movement  more  and 
more  to  the  "left."  They  aim  at  a  trade  union  congress  (or,  in 
their  vocabulary,  a  National  Guild  Congress)  which  will  be  exec- 
utive and  legislative  for  man,  the  producer,  while  Parliament  will 
execute  and  legislate  for  man,  the  consumer.  The  state  which  the 
Guild-Socialists  foresee  will  be  a  machinery  half  industrial,  half 
political  (or,  in  other  terms,  half  on  a  functional,  half  on  a  geo- 
graphical basis). 

The  political  movement  is  ill-advised  in  under-estimating  this 
industrial  movement  in  its  newest  manifestations.  Arthur  Hender- 
son has  never  fully  understood  what  David  Kirkwood  and  the  Clyde 
Workers'  Committee  were  seeking  to  do.  Some  of  the  advocates 
of  workers'  control  have  an  equal  distrust  of  political  methods  for 
achieving  their  aims.  This  distrust  is  at  times  revealed  in  the 
writings,  for  example,  of  Cole  and  S.  G.  Hobson.  The  first  labor 
members  of  Parliament  failed  to  achieve  the  large  things  hoped  for 
and  the  experience  of  the  rank  and  file  with  labor  members  in  the 
war  government  has  been  disillusioning.  Political  obstructions  to 
labor  will  precipitate  direct  action  industrially. 

It  is  probable  that  the  course  of  British  labor  in  its  two-fold 
movement  will  depend  on  the  adjustment  of  both  impulses  to  a  new 
and  common  resultant,  just  as  in  the  slow  movement  toward  political 
democracy  the  organizing  faculty  of  the  British  people  has  built  up 
an  Empire,  while  with  their  ingrained  love  of  personal  freedom  they 
have  kept  fast  hold  of  local  self-government.  It  is  in  the  interplay 
of  these  two  impulses  that  we  have  evidence  that  British  labor  is 
drawing  on  collectivism,  but  individualism  as  well,  in  endeavoring 
to  strike  a  new  balance  between  social  control  and  liberty. 

As  Arthur  Henderson  has  said: — 

In  opposition  and  presently,  as  we  believe  and  hope,  in  office, 
labor  will  seek  to  build  up  a  new  order  of  society,  rooted  in  equality, 
dedicated  to  freedom,  governed  on  democratic  principles. 

Thus,  in  the  political  field,  the  outstanding  lesson  of  the  war 
to  the  British  worker  is  that  life  has  been  conscripted  by  the 
State;  therefore,  property  can  be  conscripted  by  the  State.  The 
Labour  Party  believes  that  taxation  of  incomes  and  profits  will 
not  yield  enough  to  free  the  country  from  its  oppressive  war  debt, 
and  that  any  attempt  to  tax  food  or  the  other  necessities  of  life 
will  be  unjust  and  ruinous  to  the  masses  of  the  people.  It,  there- 
fore, demands  that  a  graduated  system  of  conscription  of  wealth 
shall  be  put  into  operation,  to  the  end  that  capital  shall  cumulatively 
become  an  instrument  of  the  common  welfare. 


TOWARDS  DEMOCRACY  IN  RECONSTRUCTION    337 

For  the  Labour  Party  would  do  more  than  put  the  accumula- 
tions of  past  generations  into  the  war-pot  along  with  the  lives  and 
liberties  of  this.  It  proposes  to  extend  the  wartime  taxation  of 
incomes,  profits  and  inheritances  in  order  to  apply  them  in  the  name 
of  the  nation  t*^  the  purposes  of  peace  as  they  were  applied  in  the 
name  of  the  nation  to  the  purposes  of  the  war.  It  affirms  that  the 
land  of  the  nation  should  belong  to  the  nation,  and  it  calls  at  once 
for  the  public  absorption  of  the  unearned  increment  of  land  values. 

It  believes  that  the  day  is  ending  for  political  parties  dominated 
by  the  owners  of  land  and  capital.  As  the  economic  structure  of 
our  time  is  defined  by  legislation  and  administration,  British  labor 
intends  to  play  its  part  in  the  formulation  of  legislation  and  in  the 
responsibilities  of  administration.  There  has  been  an  immense 
increase  during  the  war  of  industrial  discipline  under  state  control. 
If  the  state  is  to  become  the  master,  then  the  workers  are  deter- 
mined to  exercise  an  increasing  share  of  control  in  the  state. 

"The  cause  of  unrest,"  said  a  trade  union  official  at  Birming- 
ham, "is  that  we  are  trying  to  fight  a  great  war  and  at  the  same 
time  to  preserve  our  individual  liberties."  And  while  the  British 
Labour  Party  would,  on  the  basis  of  wartime  experience,  devote 
the  national  surplus  to  the  social  welfare,  retain  the  railways  and 
other  forms  of  common  service  in  public  hands,  and  expand  the 
control  and  ownership  of  mines  and  raw  materials,  he  would  be 
a  rash  prophet  who  would  assume  that  a  labor  regime  would  not 
leave  wide  areas  for  voluntary  enterprise.  Rather  it  aims  at  in- 
creased industrial  initiative  by  freeing  hoarded  stores  of  wealth 
and  untapped  sources  of  energy  to  the  community.  It  still  em- 
ploys; the  verbiage  of  old  days  in  its  manifestos,  for  it  has  not  yet 
created  a  language  to  fit  its  new  conceptions.  It  was  one  of  the 
jokes  of  the  June  conference  of  the  Labour  Party,  which  adopted  the 
reconstruction  plan,  that  Sidney  Webb,  who  has  spent  his  life  in 
arguing  for  the  socialization  of  wealth,  pleaded  on  the  floor  of  the 
convention  for  the  minting  of  a  new  term ;  but  his  efforts  were  swept 
under  by  the  votes  of  trade  unionists  who  preferred  the  old  socialist 
phrases  to  unwonted  ones  for  the  things  they  were  groping  after. 

Similarly,  the  Labour  Party  holds  that  it  is  the  duty  of  govern- 
ment to  find  suitable  work  for  all,  and,  failing  this,  to  provide 
maintenance  for  the  workers.  It  has  little  patience  with  the  notion 
that  it  is  fear  of  starvation  that  makes  the  world  go  round;  it  holds, 
rather,  that  premature  work,  overwork,  undernourishment,  unem- 
ployment slacken  the  world's  production.  But  this  does  not  mean 
that  British  labor  favors  a  lethargic  communism.  The  wartime  or- 
ganization of  Britain's  man-power  makes  it  believe  that  it  is  entirely 
possible  to  find  work  for  all;  the  wartime  leap  forward  in  produc- 


338  CONCLUSION 

tivity  makes  it  believe  that  not  only  is  this  possible  but  that  an 
altogether  new  level  of  output  and  general  prosperity  can  come  into 
being.  And  not  the  least  basis  for  its  faith  is  its  conviction  that  if 
men  feel  that  they  are  working  merely  for  their  week's  wages  and 
the  profits  of  private  employers,  one  of  the  greatest  motivations 
of  all  is  neglected.  When  men  worked  in  wartime  England  for  the 
nation's  cause,  they  put  their  backs  into  it. 

Underneath  it  all,  British  labor  is  determined  to  shake  off  bureau- 
cratic interference  and  regimentation,  which  the  war  has  revealed 
as  contrary  to  the  fundamental  instinct  for  individual  liberty.  La- 
bor will  continue  to  oppose  a  rigid  state  socialism  with  devolution  of 
function.  Direct  sovereignty  over  their  own  lives  is  the  genius  of 
the  workers'  control  movement  which  parallels  and  tempers  the  polit- 
ical movement.  It  is  a  movement  for  status — for  increasing,  not 
decreasing,  the  muster  of  self-dependent  Englishmen. 

The  workers'  control  movement  is  not  attempting  to  commandeer 
factories  and  put  them  into  the  hands  of  the  workers,  like  the 
Russian  Soviets.  It  is  going  ahead  one  step  at  a  time,  first  admin- 
istering workshop  conditions,  then  sharing  in  the  management  of 
the  factory  process.  It  is  not  trying  to  extemporize  executive  expe- 
rience over  night.  It  acts  inside  its  area  of  competence,  but  the 
change  it  is  effecting  in  the  organization  of  industry  is  fundamental. 
Just  as,  politically,  British  labor  would  not  make  a  wholesale  con- 
scription of  property,  but  nevertheless  plans  to  nalionalize  the  agri- 
cultural land,  the  mines  and  the  railways,  to  conscript  accumulated 
wealth  on  a  graduated  scale,  and  to  tax  income  and  profits,  so  indus- 
trially, British  labor  does  not  set  out  to  take  over  the  entire  indus- 
trial process  at  one  stroke.  Rather,  it  gives  challenge  to  the  old 
conception  which  left  autocratic  power  in  the  hands  of  one  factor  in 
production — the  factor  of  private  capital.  This  is  a  projection  of 
self-determination  in  industrial  life.  It  will  find  expression  in  no 
one  formula,  but  will  manifest  itself  experimentally  in  a  hundred 
different  forms  whether  under  public  or  private  ownership.  It  is, 
nonetheless,  a  decisive  step  toward  the  integration  of  economic  self- 
government,  by  shops,  districts  and  industries,  that  in  time  will 
fairly  parallel  the  forms  of  civil  government  from  town  to  nation. 

Here,  in  its  turn,  the  political  movement  comes  in  as  a  tempering 
force,  with  its  emphasis  on  the  consumers'  or  national  stake  in  indus- 
trial negotiation  and  arbitration.  Under  the  government's  Produc- 
tion Committee,  the  tribunals  include  the  employers,  labor  leaders 
and  the  public.  This  is  a  divergence  from  old  trade  union  practice 
when  the  case  was  threshed  out  jointly  by  employes  and  employers 
alone.  Thus,  under  the  old  scheme  there  was  nothing  to  prevent 
the  entrepreneurs  and  the  unions  from  rigging  the  public.    In  ship 


TOWARDS  DEMOCRACY  IN  RECONSTRUCTION    339 

building  plants,  for  example,  the  employers  might  yield  to  the  de- 
mand of  workers  for  increase  in  pay  and  tack  it  straightway  onto 
the  sale  price.  In  wartime,  this  was  of  immediate  national  concern. 
It  threw  open  the  whole  question  of  how  far  an  industry  could 
cover  by  economies  and  lessened  proiits,  a  wage  increase  without 
a  price  increase;  or  how  far  one  given  craft  could  by  its  monopoly 
position  gouge  the  public.  This  danger  is  present  in  the  Whitley 
councils ;  which  in  turn  have  been  subject  to  radical  criticism  as 
giving  equal  representation  to  small  bodies  of  managers  and  great 
bodies  of  workers;  an  antagonistic,  unstable  and  undemocratic 
equilibrium  which  the  enhancement  of  the  public's  stake  in  indus- 
try would  tend  to  offset  and  nationalization,  as  promoted  by  the 
miners,  to  overcome. 

The  newer  communal  view  is  taking  hold  of  the  newer  leader- 
ship in  the  union  movement,  and  can  be  counted  on  to  carry 
throughout  the  labor  world,  as  against  the  older  narrow  craft  view. 
It  has  manifested  itself  in  concern  for  all  the  workers  in  other  indus- 
tries, purchasers  of  the  product,  and  for  all  the  workers  of  the 
world.  The  new  communal  idea  in  labor  policy  asserts  itself  not 
only  in  the  settlement  of  labor  issues,  but  in  the  proposals  for  the 
nationalization  of  basic  industries  and  common  services.  Charac- 
teristic, also,  were  the  resolutions  adopted  by  the  British  Labour 
Party  in  its  wartime  conferences,  repudiating  the  Paris  agreement. 
Lloyd  George  did  not  meet  labor's  point  of  view  in  his  statement 
of  December,  191 7,  as  it  would  have  meant  a  break  with  dominant 
elements  in  the  coalition.  But  neither  did  he  support  the  Paris 
agreement  in  his  statement  of  war  aims.  He  omitted  it  in  deference 
to  the  labor  sentiment,  which  held  that  in  the  international  field  no 
less  than  at  home,  privilege  must  be  subordinated  to  social  welfare. 
Accordingly,  labor  called  for  democratic  control  over  raw  materials. 
It  called  for  an  international  control  over  those  weak  and  exploit- 
able territories  which  are  the  stakes  of  secret  diplomacy.  It  de- 
manded that  there  should  be  no  more  dumping  on  the  markets  of 
the  world  of  goods  produced  by  sweated  labor.  And  it  took  its  stand 
against  divisive  trade  alliances,  boycotts  and  the  perpetuation,  in  an 
economic  war  after  the  war,  of  the  forces  that  had  helped  let  the 
world  in  for  this  war. 

With  the  monopolistic  craft  type  of  mind  tends  to  go  support 
of  the  two  party  system  of  trade  government  (employers  and  em- 
ployees), the  support  of  a  protective  tariff  wall  behind  which  they 
can  jointly  put  up  the  prices  of  products  and  the  wages  of  the 
craft  to  the  disregard  of  the  rest  of  the  body  of  workers;  the  sup- 
port of  schemes  for  trade  harness  and  economic  isolation  of  com- 
peting nations.     Its  adherents  among  British  trade  unionists  lend 


340  CONCLUSION 

themselves  to  what  J.  A.  Hobson  calls  Prussian- Australianism  ^ — a 
"khaki"  party  of  imperialism,  of  protective  tariffs,  colonial  exploita- 
tion and  state  aided  industries  for  the  investor ;  plus  high  wages  and 
paternalistic  schemes  as  bribes  for  the  labor  vote. 

Henceforth,  says  Hughes  of  Australia,  the  workman  must  labor 
at  the  plow,  "with  his  sword  strapped  to  the  handle."  British 
labor  used  its  two-edged  blade  to  break  ground  for  an  altogether 
different  peace  from  that. 

In  its  wartime  international  policy,  it  steadfastly  insisted  on  its 
principle  of  democratic  appeal  first  to  the  common  people  of  the 
Allies  and  then  to  the  common  people  of  the  enemy.  It  formulated 
that  appeal  and  laid  it  before  the  workers  of  the  hostile  countries. 
In  building  its  inter-Allied  program,  labor  worked  out  a  new  organ- 
ization. Efforts  had  been  made  to  create  a  trade  union  inter- 
Allied  conference.  They  failed.  Efforts  had  been  made  to  create 
a  socialist  inter-Allied  conference.  They,  too,  failed.  Finally, 
cohesion  was  found  by  uniting  the  forces  of  the  trade  unions  and  the 
socialists  in  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conferences.  It 
was  in  thus  harmonizing  the  two  active  principles  at  work  in  the 
labor  movement,  industrial  and  political,  that  British  organizers  dis- 
played their  leadership. 

The  leaders  of  Britain  held  their  people  united  through  four 
years  of  war.  France,  waging  a  defensive  warfare  on  its  own  soil, 
instinctively  reacted  as  a  unit  against  the  invader.  And  the  military 
power  of  Germany,  drunk  with  victory  and  conquest  of  enemy  ter- 
ritory, yet  held  up  triumph  to  its  people  as  a  release  from  their 
ring  of  foes.  But  Britain's  task  was  more  difficult.  Uninvaded  and 
with  few  victories,  she  held  united.  Labor  leadership  shares  in  the 
credit  for  this  long-enduring  unity.  It  made  the  war  one  for 
fire  ides  as  well  as  chancellories.  The  workers  were  at  once  backers 
of  the  war  and  forerunners  of  peace. 

They  freed  themselves  from  the  vague  internationalism  of  alien 
groups  which  tended  to  disregard  the  deep  instinct  for  nationality, 
and  at  the  same  time  they  refused  to  permit  the  passions  of  war 
to  divert  them  from  their  constructive  program  for  an  international 
order.  They  never  blurred  the  issues  of  the  struggle  against  Prus- 
sian aggression.  But  they  were  equally  determined  that  military 
victory  should  not  be  used  for  territorial  aggrandizement  and  the 
perpetuation  of  hate.  It  is  the  merit  of  the  British  and  inter-Allied 
workers  that  during  war  they  reached  out  beyond  the  war  to  the 
fellowship  of  free  peoples. 

It  was  to  this  effect  and  in  this  even  tone  of  justice  that  inter- 
Allied  labor  spoke  to  the  nations  of  the  world,  and,  in  so  speaking, 

*  "Democracy  After  the  War,"  by  J.  A.  Hobson. 


TOWARDS  DEMOCRACY  IN  RECONSTRUCTION    341 

assured  the  common  people  of  the  enemy  that  they  would  not  ex- 
change one  oppression  for  another,  if  they  overthrew  their  auto- 
cratic governments. 

J.  W.  Ogden,  chairman  of  the  Derby  Trades  Union  Congress, 
said  to  his  fellow  delegates: — 

Let  us  lift  our  minds  above  the  clouds  of  doubt,  suspicion  and 
dissension  that  have  blurred  our  vision  and  warped  our  judgment, 
and  in  the  higher,  clearer  and  purer  atmosphere  we  shall  discern 
the  true  goal  of  our  aspirations  and  ambitions.  The  industrial  Ca- 
naan towards  which  we  have  wended  so  long  and  so  laboriously, 
world  brotherhood,  may  seem  farther  away  to-day  than  ever.  Irt 
spite  of  that,  1  shall  still  look  towards  it  as  the  salvation  of  the 
world,  and  the  only  hope  of  the  workers. 

The  British  labor  movement  is  an  organic  growth,  which,  like 
everything  else  in  wartime  England,  has  gone  through  in  four  years 
what  would  ordinarily  have  required  twenty  years.  The  spokesmen 
and  programs  of  British  labor  do  not  voice  class  hatred.  It  shares 
with  the  government  and  with  enlightened  employers  in  creating 
constitutionahsm  in  industry:  a  new  spirit  and  a  new  machinery. 
Labor  is  developing  something  different  from  the  old-time  trade 
unionism  (with  its  concentration  on  wages  and  hours)  and  the  old- 
time  class-conscious  Socialism — broader  than  the  one,  freer  than  the 
other,  typically  British  in  its  inconsistencies  and  in  its  downright 
competence. 

What  baffled  some  American  visitors  in  British  labor  is  what 
baffles  the  elderly  in  the  life  of  Europe  to-day:  the  variety,  the 
wealth  of  creative  impulse,  the  hearty  dissent  from  custom  and 
tradition;  the  zest  for  challenging  the  very  origins  of  belief,  and 
for  shaking  the  foundations  of  venerable  institutions. 

It  is  an  experimental  attitude  toward  life.  The  spirit  of  its 
quest  is  springy  and  buoyant  and  impudent.  An  elan  is  being  recap- 
tured, lost  for  one  hundred  years  of  the  factory  system.  From  the 
ranks  of  the  returned  soldiers  and  the  mobilized  shops,  new  leaders 
will  spring  up  and  they  will  be  young. 

British  labor  cannot  be  charted  off  into  tidy  little  thought  forms. 
It  is  a  living,  growing,  and  moving  thing.  Its  vitality  spills  over 
into  many  activities.  To  the  observer  it  seems  as  unwieldy  and  top- 
heavy  and  split  up  as  the  British  Commonwealth  of  which  it  is  an 
ever-growing  part.  But  under  crisis  it  reveals  the  same  inner  cohe- 
rence as  the  British  Commonwealth  revealed  under  the  strain  of 
war.  A  community  of  spirit  holds  British  labor  together.  Back  of 
its  machinery  of  action  there  is  a  profound  belief.  It  is  a  belief 
in  the  worth  of  the  individual.  And  this  belief  leads  to  the  desire 
for  founding  a  society  where  the  common  man  will  be  at  home. 


APPENDIX  I 
STATEMENT  OF  WAR  AIMS 

AS  ADOPTED  AT  A  JOINT  CONFERENCE  OF  THE  SOCIETIES  AFFILIATED 
WITH  THE  BRITISH  TRADES  UNION  CONGRESS  AND  THE  BRITISH 
LABOUR  PARTY  AT  CENTRAL  HALL,  WESTMINSTER,  ON  DECEMBER 
28,    I917 

I.  THE  WAR 

The  British  Labour  movement  sees  no  reason  to  depart  from 
the  declaration  unanimously  agreed  to  at  the  Conference  of 
the  Socialist  and  Labour  Parties  of  the  Allied  Nations  on  Feb- 
ruary 14,  1915,  and  it  reaffirms  that  declaration.  Whatever 
may  have  been  the  causes  of  the  outbreak  of  war,  it  is  clear 
that  the  peoples  of  Europe,  who  are  necessarily  the  chief  suf- 
ferers from  its  horrors,  had  themselves  no  hand  in  it.  Their 
common  interest  is  now  so  to  conduct  the  terrible  struggle  in 
which  they  find  themselves  engaged  as  to  bring  it,  as  soon 
as  may  be  possible,  to  an  issue  in  a  secure  and  lasting  peace 
for  the  world. 

2.    MAKING  THE  WORLD   SAFE   FOR  DEMOCRACY 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  causes  for  which  the  war  was 
begun,  the  fundamental  purpose  of  the  British  Labour  move- 
ment in  supporting  the  continuance  of  the  struggle  is  that  the 
world  may  henceforth  be  made  safe  for  democracy. 

Of  all  the  war  aims,  none  is  so  important  to  the  peoples  of 
the  world  as  that  there  shall  be  henceforth  on  earth  no  more 
war.  Whoever  triumphs,  the  people  will  have  lost  unless  some 
effective  method  of  preventing  war  can  be  found. 

As  means  to  this  end,  the  British  Labour  movement  relies 
very  largely  upon  the  complete  democratisation  of  all  countries; 
on  the  frank  abandonment  of  every  form  of  Imperialism;  on 

343 


344  APPENDIX  I 

the  suppression  of  secret  diplomacy,  and  on  the  placing  of 
foreign  policy,  just  as  much  as  home  policy,  under  the  control 
of  popularly  elected  Legislatures;  on  the  absolute  responsibility 
of  the  Foreign  Minister  of  each  country  to  its  Legislature;  on 
such  concerted  action  as  may  be  possible  for  the  universal  aboli- 
tion of  compulsory  military  service  in  all  countries,  the  com- 
mon limitation  of  the  costly  armaments  by  which  all  peoples 
are  burdened,  and  the  entire  abolition  of  profit-making  arma- 
ment firms,  whose  pecuniary  interest  lies  always  in  war  scares 
and  rivalry  in  preparation  for  war. 

But  it  demands,  in  addition,  that  it  should  be  an  essential  part 
of  the  treaty  of  peace  itself  that  there  should  be  forthwith  es- 
tablished a  Supernational  Authority,  or  League  of  Nations, 
which  should  not  only  be  adhered  to  by  all  the  present  bel- 
ligerents, but  which  every  other  independent  sovereign  state  in 
the  world  should  be  pressed  to  join ;  the  immediate  establish- 
ment of  such  League  of  Nations  not  only  of  an  International 
High  Court  for  the  settlement  of  all  disputes  between  states 
that  are  of  justiciable  nature,  but  also  of  appropriate  ma- 
chinery for  prompt  and  effective  mediation  between  states  at 
issue  that  are  not  justiciable;  the  formation  of  an  Inter- 
national Legislature,  in  which  the  representatives  of  every 
civilised  state  would  have  their  allotted  share ;  the  gradual 
development,  as  far  as  may  prove  to  be  possible,  of  interna- 
tional legislation  agreed  to  by  and  definitely  binding  upon  the 
several  states,  and  for  a  solemn  agreement  and  pledge  by 
all  states  that  every  issue  between  any  two  or  more  of  them 
shall  be  submitted  for  settlement  as  aforesaid,  and  that  they 
will  all  make  common  cause  against  any  state  which  fails  to 
adhere  to  this  agreement. 

3.    TERRITORIAL   ADJUSTMENTS 

The  British  Labour  movement  has  no  sympathy  with  the  at- 
tempts made,  now  in  this  quarter  and  now  in  that,  to  convert 
this  war  into  a  war  of  conquest,  whether  what  is  sought  to  be 
acquired  by  force  is  territory  or  wealth,  nor  should  the 
struggle  be  prolonged  for  a  single  day,  once  the  conditions  of  a 
permanent  peace  can  be  secured,  merely  for  the  sake  of  ex- 
tending the  boundaries  of  any  state. 

But  it  is  impossible  to  ignore  the  fact  that,  not  only  resti- 
tution and  reparation,  but  also  certain  territorial  readjustments 


APPENDIX  I  345 

are  required  if  a  renewal  of  armaments  and  war  is  to  be 
avoided.  These  readjustments  must  be  such  as  can  be  arrived 
at  by  common  agreement  on  the  general  principle  of  allowring 
all  people  to  settle  their  own  destinies,  and  for  the  purpose 
of  removing  any  obvious  cause  of  future  international  conflict. 

(a)  Belgium 

The  British  Labour  movement  emphatically  insists  that  a 
foremost  condition  of  peace  must  be  the  reparation  by  the 
German  Government,  under  the  direction  of  an  International 
Commission,  of  the  wrong  admittedly  done  to  Belgium ;  payment 
by  that  Government  for  all  the  damage  that  has  resulted  from 
this  wrong,  and  the  restoration  of  Belgium  to  complete  and 
untrammelled  independent  sovereignty,  leaving  to  the  decision 
of  the  Belgian  people  the  determination  of  their  own  future 
policy  in  all  respects. 

(&)   Alsace  and  Lorraine 

The  British  Labour  movement  reaffirms  its  reprobation  of  the 
crime  against  the  peace  of  the  world  by  which  Alsace  and 
Lorraine  were  forcibly  torn  from  France  in  1871,  a  political 
blunder  the  effects  of  which  have  contributed  in  no  small  degree 
to  the  continuance  of  unrest  and  the  growth  of  militarism  in 
Europe ;  and,  profoundly  sympathising  with  the  unfortunate  in- 
habitants of  Alsace  and  Lorraine,  who  have  been  subjected  to 
so  much  repression,  asks  in  accordance  with  the  declarations 
of  the  French  Socialists  that  they  shall  be  allowed  under  the 
protection  of  the  Supernational  Authority,  or  League  of 
Nations,  freely  to  decide  what  shall  be  their  future  political 
position. 

(c)  The  Balkans 

The  British  Labour  movement  suggests  that  the  whole 
problem  of  the  reorganisation  of  the  administration  of  the  peo- 
ples of  the  Balkan  Peninsula  might  be  dealt  with  by  a  Special 
Conference  of  their  representatives,  or  by  an  authoritative  In- 
ternational Commission,  on  the  basis  of  (a)  the  complete  free- 
dom of  these  people  to  settle  their  own  destinies,  irrespective 
of  Austrian,  Turkish,  or  other  foreign  dominion;  (b)  the  in- 
dependent sovereignties  of  the  several  nationalities  in  those 
districts  in  which  these  are  largely  predominant;  (c)  the  uni- 


346  APPENDIX  I 

versal  adoption  of  religious  tolerance,  the  equal  citizenship  of 
all  races,  and  local  autonomy;  (d)  a  Customs  Union  embrac- 
ing the  whole  of  the  Balkan  States;  and  (e)  the  entry  of  all  the 
Balkan  National  States  into  a  Federation  for  the  concerted  ar- 
rangement by  mutual  agreement  among  themselves  of  all  mat- 
ters of  common  concern. 

(d)  Italy 

The  British  Labour  movement  declares  its  Vi^armest  sympathy 
with  the  people  of  Italian  blood  and  speech  who  have  been  left 
outside  the  inconvenient  and  indefensible  boundaries  that  have 
as  a  result  of  the  diplomatic  agreements  of  the  past  been  assigned 
to  the  kingdom  of  Italy,  and  supports  their  claim  to  be  united 
with  those  of  their  own  race  and  tongue.  It  realises  that  ar- 
rangements may  be  necessary  for  securing  the  legitimate  in- 
terests of  the  people  of  Italy  in  the  adjacent  seas,  but  it  has 
no  sympathy  with  the  far-reaching  aims  of  conquest  of  Italian 
imperialism,  and  believes  that  all  legitimate  needs  can  be  safe- 
guarded without  precluding  a  like  recognition  of  the  needs  of 
others  or  an  annexation  of  other  peoples'  territories. 

(e)  Poland,  etc. 

With  regard  to  the  other  cases  in  dispute,  from  Luxem- 
bourg on  the  one  hand,  of  which  the  independence  has  been 
temporarily  destroyed,  to  the  lands  now  under  foreign  domina- 
tion inhabited  by  other  races — the  outstanding  example  being 
that  of  the  Poles — the  British  Labour  movement  relies,  as  the 
only  way  of  achieving  a  lasting  settlement,  on  the  application 
of  the  principle  of  allowing  each  people  to  settle  its  own 
destiny. 

(/)  The  Jews  and  Palestine 

The  British  Labour  movement  demands  for  the  Jews  of  all 
countries  the  same  elementary  rights  of  tolerance,  freedom 
of  residence  and  trade,  and  equal  citizenship  that  ought  to  be 
extended  to  all  the  inhabitants  of  every  nation.  But  it  further 
expresses  the  hope  that  it  may  be  practicable  by  agreement 
among  all  the  nations  to  set  free  Palestine  from  the  harsh 
and  oppressive  government  of  the  Turk,  in  order  that  the 
country  may  form  a  free  state,  under  international  guarantee, 
to  which  such  of  the  Jewish  people  as  desire  to  do  so  may  re- 


APPENDIX  I 


347 


turn  and  may  work  out  their  own  salvation,  free  from  inter- 
ference by  those  of  alien  race  or  religion. 

(g)  The  Problem  of  the  Turkish  Empire 

The  whole  civilised  world  condemns  the  handing  back  to  the 
universally  execrated  rule  of  the  Turkish  Government  any 
subject  people  which  has  once  been  freed  from  it.  Thus,  what- 
ever may  be  proposed  with  regard  to  Armenia,  Mesopotamia, 
and  Arabia,  they  cannot  be  restored  to  the  tyranny  of  the 
Sultan  and  his  pashas. 

The  British  Labour  movement  disclaims  all  sympathy  with  the 
imperialist  aims  of  governments  and  capitalists  who  would 
make  of  these  and  other  territories  now  dominated  by  the 
Turkish  hordes  merely  instruments  either  of  exploitation  or 
militarism.  If  in  these  territories  it  is  impracticable  to  leave 
it  to  the  peoples  to  settle  their  own  destinies,  the  British  Labour 
movement  insists  that,  conformably  with  the  policy  of  "no  an- 
nexations," they  should  be  placed  for  administration  in  the 
hands  of  a  commission  acting  under  the  Supernational  Au- 
thority or  League  of  Nations.  It  is  further  suggested  that  the 
peace  of  the  world  requires  that  Constantinople  should  be 
made  a  free  port,  permanently  neutralised,  and  placed  (to- 
gether with  both  shores  of  the  Dardanelles  and  possibly  some 
or  all  of  Asia  Minor)  under  the  same  impartial  administration. 

(h)  The  Colonies  of  Tropical  Africa 

With  regard  to  the  colonies  of  the  several  belligerents  in 
tropical  Africa  from  sea  to  sea — whether  including  all  north 
of  the  Zambesi  River  and  south  of  the  Sahara  Desert,  or  only 
those  lying  between  15  degrees  north  and  15  degrees  south 
latitude,  which  are  already  the  subject  of  international  control 
— the  British  Labour  movement  disclaims  all  sympathy  with  the 
imperialist  idea  that  these  should  form  the  booty  of  any  na- 
tion, should  be  exploited  for  the  profit  of  the  capitalist,  or 
should  be  used  for  the  promotion  of  the  militarist  aims  of 
governments.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  it  is  impracticable  here 
to  leave  the  various  peoples  concerned  to  settle  their  own 
destinies,  it  is  suggested  that  the  interests  of  humanity  would  be 
best  served  by  the  full  and  frank  abandonment  by  all  the 
belligerents  of  any  dreams  of  an  African  empire;  the  trans- 


348  APPENDIX  I 

fer  of  the  present  colonies  of  the  European  Powers  in  tropical 
Africa,  however  the  limits  of  this  area  may  be  defined,  to  the 
proposed  Supernational  Authority  or  League  of  Nations  herein 
suggested,  and  their  administration  under  the  legislative  coun- 
cil of  that  authority  as  a  single,  independent  African  state, 
with  its  own  trained  staff,  on  the  principles  of  (i)  taking  ac- 
count in  each  locality  of  the  wishes  of  the  people  when  these 
can  be  ascertained;  (2)  protection  of  the  natives  against  ex- 
ploitation and  oppression  and  the  preservation  of  their  tribal 
interests;  (3)  all  revenues  raised  to  be  expended  for  the  wel- 
fare and  development  of  the  African  state  itself,  and  (4)  the 
permanent  neutralisation  of  this  African  state  and  its  abstention 
from  participation  in  international  rivalries  or  any  future  wars. 

(I)   Other  Cases 

The  British  Labour  movement  suggests  that  any  other  terri- 
tories in  which  it  is  proposed  that  the  future  safeguarding  of 
pacific  relations  makes  necessary  a  transfer  of  sovereignty 
should  be  made  the  subject  of  amicable  bargaining,  with  an 
equivalent  exchange,  in  money  or  otherwise. 

4.   ECONOMIC  RELATIONS 

The  British  Labour  movement  declares  against  all  the  pro- 
jects now  being  prepared  by  Imperialists  and  capitalists,  not 
in  any  one  country  only,  but  in  most  countries,  for  an  economic 
war  after  peace  has  been  secured,  either  against  one  or  other 
foreign  nation,  or  against  all  foreign  nations,  as  such  an  eco- 
nomic war,  if  begun  by  any  country,  would  inevitably  lead  to 
reprisals,  to  which  each  nation  in  turn  might  in  self-defence 
be  driven. 

It  realises  that  all  such  attempts  at  economic  aggression, 
whether  by  protective  tariffs  or  capitalist  trusts  or  monopolies, 
inevitably  result  in  the  spoliation  of  the  working  classes  of  the 
several  countries  for  the  profit  of  the  capitalists;  and  the 
British  workmen  see  in  the  alliance  between  the  military  Im- 
perialists and  the  fiscal  Protectionists  in  any  country  whatso- 
ever, not  only  a  serious  danger  to  the  prosperity  of  the  masses 
of  the  people,  but  also  a  grave  menace  to  peace. 

On  the  other  hand,  if  unfortunately  a  genuine  peace  cannot 
be  secured,  the  right  of  each  nation  to  the  defence  of  its  own 
economic  interests,  and,  in  face  of  the  world  shortage  herein- 


APPENDIX  I  349 

after  mentioned,  to  the  conservation  for  its  own  people  of  a 
sufficiency  of  its  own  supplies  of  foodstuffs  and  raw  material 
cannot  be  denied. 

The  British  Labour  movement  accordingly  urges  upon  the 
Labour  parties  of  all  countries  the  importance  of  insisting,  in 
the  attitude  of  the  Government  towards  commercial  enter- 
prises, along  with  the  necessary  control  of  supplies  for  its  own 
people,  on  the  principle  of  the  open  door,  on  customs  duties 
being  limited  strictly  to  revenue  purposes,  and  on  there  being  no 
harsh  discrimination  against  foreign  countries.  But  it  urges 
equally  the  importance,  not  merely  of  conservation,  but  also  of 
the  utmost  possible  development  by  appropriate  Government 
action  of  the  resources  of  every  country  for  the  benefit  not  only 
of  its  own  people,  but  also  of  the  world,  and  the  need  for  an 
international  agreement  for  the  enforcement  in  all  countries  of 
the  legislation  on  factory  conditions,  hours  of  labour,  and  the 
prevention  of  sweating  and  unhealthy  trades  necessary  to  pro- 
tect the  workers  against  exploitation  and  oppression. 

5.   THE  PROBLEMS   OF   PEACE 

To  make  the  world  safe  for  democracy  involves  much  more 
than  the  prevention  of  war,  either  military  or  economic.  It 
will  be  a  device  of  the  capitalist  interests  to  pretend  that  the 
treaty  of  peace  need  concern  itself  only  with  the  cessation 
of  the  struggle  of  the  armed  forces  and  with  any  necessary  ter- 
ritorial readjustments.  The  British  Labour  movement  insists 
that  in  view  of  the  probable  world-wide  shortage  after  the 
war  of  exportable  foodstuffs  and  raw  materials,  and  of 
merchant  shipping,  it  is  imperative,  in  order  to  prevent  the 
most  serious  hardships  and  even  possible  famine,  in  one  country 
or  another,  that  systematic  arrangements  should  be  made  on 
an  international  basis  for  the  allocation  and  conveyance  of  the 
available  exportable  surpluses  of  these  commodities  to  the  dif- 
ferent countries  in  proportion  not  to  their  purchasing  powers, 
but  to  their  several  pressing  needs,  and  that  within  each 
country  the  Government  must  for  some  time  maintain  its  con- 
trol of  the  most  indispensable  commodities  in  order  to  secure 
their  appropriation,  not  in  a  competitive  market  mainly  to  the 
richer  classes  in  proportion  to  their  means,  but  systematically 
to  meet  the  most  urgent  needs  of  the  whole  community  on  the 
principle  of  "No  cake  for  any  one  until  all  have  bread." 


350  APPENDIX  I 

Moreover,  it  cannot  but  be  anticipated  that  in  all  countries 
the  dislocation  of  industry  attendant  on  peace,  the  instant  dis- 
charge of  millions  of  munition  workers  and  workers  in  war 
trades,  and  the  demobilisation  of  soldiers — in  face  of  the  scarcity 
of  industrial  capital,  the  shortage  of  raw  materials,  and  the 
insecurity  of  commercial  enterprise — will,  unless  prompt  and 
energetic  action  be  taken  by  the  several  Governments,  plunge 
a  large  part  of  the  wage-earning  population  into  all  the  miseries 
of  unemployment  more  or  less  prolonged.  In  view  of  the  fact 
that  widespread  unemployment  in  any  country,  like  a  famine, 
is  an  injury  not  to  that  country  alone,  but  impoverishes  also  the 
rest  of  the  world,  the  British  Labour  movement  holds  that  it  is 
the  duty  of  every  government  to  take  immediate  action,  not 
merely  to  relieve  the  unemployment  when  unemployment  has 
set  in,  but  actually,  so  far  as  may  be  practicable  to  prevent 
the  occurrence  of  unemployment. 

It  therefore  urges  upon  the  Labour  Parties  of  every  country 
the  necessity  of  their  pressing  upon  their  governments  the 
preparation  of  plans  for  the  execution  of  all  the  innumerable 
public  works  (such  as  the  making  and  repairing  of  roads  and 
railways,  the  erection  of  schools  and  public  buildings,  the 
provision  of  working  class  dwellings,  and  the  reclamation  and 
afforestation  of  land)  that  will  be  required  in  the  near  future, 
not  for  the  sake  of  finding  measures  of  relief  for  the  unem- 
ployed, but  with  a  view  to  these  works  being  undertaken  at 
such  a  rate  in  each  locality  as  will  suffice,  together  with  the 
various  capitalist  enterprises  that  may  be  in  progress,  to 
maintain  at  a  fairly  uniform  level  year  by  year,  and  through- 
out each  year,  the  aggregate  demand  for  labour,  and  thus  pre- 
vent there  being  any  unemployed.  It  is  now  known  that  in 
this  way  it  is  quite  possible  for  any  government  to  prevent,  if 
it  chooses,  the  very  occurrences  of  any  widespread  or  pro- 
longed involuntary  unemployment,  which,  if  it  is  now  in  any 
country  allowed  to  occur,  is  as  much  the  result  of  government 
neglect  as  is  any  epidemic  disease. 

6.   RESTORATION   AND  REPARATION 

The  British  Labour  movement  holds  that  one  of  the  most 
imperative  duties  of  all  governments  immediately  peace  is  de- 
clared will  be  the  restoration,  so  far  as  may  be  possible,  of 
the   homes,   farms,   factories,   public  buildings,   and  means  of 


APPENDIX  I  351 

communication  in  France,  Belgium,  Tyrol  and  North  Italy, 
East  Prussia,  Poland,  Galicia,  Russia,  Rumania,  the  Balkans, 
Greece,  Armenia,  Asia  Minor,  and  Central  Africa,  that  the 
restoration  should  not  be  limited  to  compensation  for  public 
buildings,  capitalist  undertakings,  and  material  property  proved 
to  be  destroyed  or  damaged,  but  should  be  extended  to  setting 
up  wage  earners  and  peasants  themselves  in  homes  and  em- 
ployments, and  that  to  insure  the  full  and  impartial  application 
of  these  principles  the  assessment  and  distribution  of  the  com- 
pensation so  far  as  the  cost  is  contributed  by  any  international 
fund  should  be  made  under  the  direction  of  an  international 
commission. 

But  the  British  Labour  movement  will  not  be  satisfied  unless 
there  is  a  full  and  free  judicial  investigation  into  the  accusa- 
tions so  freely  made  on  all  sides  that  particular  governments 
have  ordered,  and  particular  officers  have  exercised,  acts  of 
cruelty,  oppression,  violence  and  theft  against  individual  vic- 
tims for  which  no  justification  can  be  found  in  the  ordinary 
usages  of  war.  It  draws  attention  in  particular  to  the  loss  of 
life  and  property  of  merchant  seamen  and  other  non-com- 
batants (including  women  and  children)  resulting  from  this 
inhuman  and  ruthless  conduct. 

It  should  be  part  of  the  conditions  of  peace  that  there  should 
be  forthwith  set  up  a  court  of  claims  and  accusations,  which 
should  investigate  all  such  allegations  as  may  be  brought  before 
it,  summon  the  accused  person  or  government  to  answer  the 
complaint,  to  pronounce  judgment  and  award  compensation  or 
damages,  payable  by  the  individual  or  government  condemned, 
to  the  persons  who  had  suffered  wrong,  or  to  their  dependents. 
The  several  governments  must  be  responsible,  financially  and 
otherwise,  for  the  presentation  of  the  cases  of  their  respective 
nationals  to  such  a  court  of  claims  and  accusations. 


APPENDIX  II 
MEMORANDUM  ON  WAR  AIMS 

AGREED  UPON  AT  THE  INTER-ALLIED  LABOUR  AND  SOCIALIST  CON- 
FERENCE, CENTRAL  HALL,  WESTMINSTER,  LONDON,  S.  W.,  FEB- 
RUARY 20-24,    I918 

I.   THE   WAR 

The  Conference  declares  that  whatever  may  have  been  the 
cause  of  the  outbreak  of  war,  it  is  clear  that  the  peoples  of 
Europe,  who  are  necessarily  the  chief  sufferers  from  its  hor- 
rors, had  themselves  no  hand  in  it. 

The  Conference  sees  no  reason  to  depart  from  the  following 
declaration  unanimously  agreed  to  at  the  Conference  of  the 
Socialist  and  Labour  Parties  of  the  Allied  Nations  on  Feb- 
ruary 14th,   191 5: — 

"This  Conference  cannot  ignore  the  profound  general  causes 
of  the  European  conflict,  itself  a  monstrous  product  of  the 
antagonisms  which  tear  asunder  capitalist  society  and  the  ag- 
gressive policy  of  colonialism  and  imperialism,  against  which 
International  Socialism  has  never  ceased  to  fight,  and  in  which 
every  Government  has  its  share  of  responsibility. 

"The  invasion  of  Belgium  and  France  by  the  German  armies 
threatens  the  very  existence  of  independent  nationalities,  and 
strikes  a  blow  at  all  faith  in  treaties.  In  these  circumstances  a 
victory  for  German  Imperialism  would  be  the  defeat  and  the 
destruction  of  democracy  and  liberty  in  Europe.  The  Socialists 
of  Great  Britain,  Belgium,  France,  Italy,*  and  Russia  do  not 
pursue  the  political  and  economic  crushing  of  Germany;  they 
are  not  at  war  with  the  peoples,  but  only  with  the  Governments 
by  which  they  are  oppressed.  They  demand  that  Belgium 
shall  be  liberated  and  compensated.  They  demand  that  the 
question  of  Poland   shall   be   settled   in   accordance  with  the 

*  The  word  "Italy"  was  added  February  24th,  1918,  at  the  request 
of  the  Italian  delegation. 

352 


APPENDIX  II  353 

wishes  of  the  Polish  people,  either  in  the  sense  of  autonomy 
in  the  midst  of  another  State,  or  in  that  of  complete  inde- 
pendence. They  demand  that  throughout  all  Europe,  from 
Alsace-Lorraine  to  the  Balkans,  those  populations  that  have 
been  annexed  by  force  shall  receive  the  right  freely  to  dis- 
pose of  themselves. 

"While  inflexibly  resolved  to  fight  until  victory  is  achieved  to 
accomplish  this  task  of  liberation,  the  Socialists  are  none  the 
less  resolved  to  resist  any  attempt  to  transform  this  defensive 
war  into  a  war  of  conquest,  which  would  only  prepare  fresh 
conflicts,  create  new  grievances,  and  subject  various  peoples 
more  than  ever  to  the  double  plague  of  armaments  and  war. 

"Convinced  that  they  are  remaining  true  to  the  principles  of 
the  International,  the  members  of  the  Conference  express  the 
hope  that  the  working  classes  of  all  the  different  countries, 
recognising  the  identity  of  their  fundamental  interests,  will  be- 
fore long  find  themselves  united  again  in  their  struggle  against 
militarism  and  capitalist  Imperialism.  The  victory  of  the  Al- 
lied Powers  must  be  a  victory  for  popular  liberty,  for  unity, 
independence,  and  autonomy  of  the  nations  in  the  peaceful 
Federation  of  the  United  States  of  Europe  and  the  world." 

2.    MAKING   THE    WORLD   SAFE   FOR   DEMOCRACY 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  objects  for  which  the  War  was 
begun,  the  fundamental  purpose  of  the  Conference  in  support- 
ing the  continuance  of  the  struggle  is  that  the  world  may  hence- 
forth be  made  safe  for  Democracy.  Of  all  the  conditions  of 
Peace  none  is  so  important  to  the  peoples  of  the  world  as  that 
there  should  be  henceforth  on  earth  no  more  War. 

Whoever  triumphs,  the  peoples  will  have  lost  unless  an  inter- 
national system  is  established  which  will  prevent  war.  It 
would  mean  nothing  to  declare  the  right  of  peoples  to  self-de- 
termination if  this  right  were  left  at  the  mercy  of  new  viola- 
tions, and  was  not  protected  by  a  Supernational  Authority. 
That  authority  can  be  no  other  than  the  League  of  Nations, 
which  not  only  all  the  present  belligerents,  but  every  other  in- 
dependent state,  should  be  pressed  to  join. 

The  constitution  of  such  a  League  of  Nations  implies  the 
immediate  establishment  of  an  International  High  Court,  not 
only  for  the  settlement  of  all  disputes  between  states  that 
are  of  justiciable   nature,   but  also   for   prompt   and   effective 


354  APPENDIX  II 

mediation  between  states  in  other  issues  that  vitally  interest  the 
power  or  honour  of  such  states.  It  is  also  under  the  con- 
trol of  the  League  of  Nations  that  the  consultation  of  peo- 
ples for  purposes  of  self-determination  must  be  organised. 
This  popular  right  can  be  vindicated  only  by  popular  vote.  The 
League  of  Nations  shall  establish  the  procedure  of  international 
jurisdiction,  fix  the  methods  which  will  guarantee  a  free  and 
genuine  election,  restore  the  political  rights  of  individuals 
which  violence  and  conquest  may  have  injured,  repress  any 
attempt  to  use  pressure  or  corruption,  and  prevent  any  sub- 
sequent reprisals.  It  will  be  also  necessary  to  form  an  Inter- 
national Legislature  in  which  the  representatives  of  every 
civilised  state  would  have  their  allotted  share,  and  energetically 
push  forward,  step  by  step,  the  development  of  International 
Legislation  agreed  to  by  and  definitely  binding  upon  the 
several  states. 

By  a  solemn  agreement  all  the  states  and  peoples  consulted 
shall  pledge  themselves  to  submit  every  issue  between  two  or 
more  of  them  to  arbitration  as  aforesaid.  Refusal  to  accept 
arbitration  or  to  submit  to  the  settlement  will  imply  deliberate 
aggression,  and  all  the  nations  will  necessarily  have  to  make 
common  cause,  by  using  any  and  every  means  at  their  dis- 
posal, either  economic  or  military,  against  any  state  or  states 
refusing  to  submit  to  the  arbitration  award,  or  attempting  to 
break  the  world's  covenant  of  peace. 

But  the  sincere  acceptance  of  the  rules  and  decisions  of  the 
Supernational  Authority  implies  the  complete  democratisation 
in  all  countries;  the  removal  of  all  the  arbitrary  powers  who 
until  now  have  assumed  the  right  of  choosing  between  peace 
and  war;  the  maintenance  or  creation  of  legislatures  elected 
by  and  intended  to  express  the  sovereign  right  of  the  people; 
the  suppression  of  secret  diplomacy,  to  be  replaced  by  the  con- 
duct of  foreign  policy  under  the  control  of  popular  legislatures, 
and  the  publication  of  all  treaties,  which  must  never  be  in  con- 
travention of  the  stipulations  of  the  League  of  Nations,  with 
the  absolute  responsibility  of  the  Government,  and  more  par- 
ticularly of  the  Foreign  Minister,  of  each  country  to  its 
Legislature. 

Only  such  a  policy  will  enforce  the  frank  abandonment  of 
every  form  of  Imperialism.  When  based  on  universal  democ- 
racy, in  a  world  in  which  effective  international  guarantees 
against  aggression  have  been  secured,  the  League  of  Nations 


APPENDIX  II  355 

will  achieve  the  complete  suppression  of  force  as  the  means  of 
settling    international   differences. 

The  League  of  Nations,  in  order  to  prepare  for  the  con- 
certed abolition  of  compulsory  military  service  in  all  countries, 
must  first  take  steps  for  the  prohibition  of  fresh  armaments  on 
land  and  sea,  and  for  the  common  limitation  of  the  existing 
armaments  by  which  all  the  peoples  are  already  overburdened; 
as  well  as  the  control  of  war  manufactures  and  the  enforce- 
ment of  such  agreements  as  may  be  agreed  to  thereupon.  The 
state  must  undertake  such  manufactures  themselves,  so  as 
entirely  to  abolish  profit-making  armament  firms,  whose  pe- 
cuniary interest  lies  always  in  the  war  scares  and  progressive 
competition  in  the  preparation  for  war. 

The  nations,  being  armed  solely  for  self-defence  and  for 
such  action  as  the  League  of  Nations  may  ask  them  to  take  in 
defence  of  international  right,  will  be  left  free,  under  in- 
ternational control,  either  to  create  a  voluntarily  recruited 
force  or  to  organise  the  nation  for  defence  without  profes- 
sional armies  for  long  terms  of  military  service. 

To  give  effect  to  the  above  principles,  the  Conference  de- 
clares that  the  rules  upon  which  the  League  of  Nations  will 
be  founded  must  be  included  in  the  Treaty  of  Peace,  and  will 
henceforward  become  the  basis  of  the  settlement  of  differences. 
In  that  spirit  the  Conference  expresses  its  agreement  with  the 
propositions  put  forward  by  President  Wilson  in  his  last  mes- 
sage : — 

1st.  That  each  part  of  the  final  settlement  must  be  based 
upon  the  essential  justice  of  that  particular  case  and  upon  such 
adjustments  as  are  most  likely  to  bring  a  peace  that  will  be 
permanent; 

2nd.  That  peoples  and  provinces  are  not  to  be  bartered 
about  from  sovereignty  to  sovereignty  as  if  they  were  chattels 
and  pawns  in  a  game,  even  the  great  game  now  for  ever  dis- 
credited of  the  balance  of  power;  but  that 

3rd.  Every  territorial  settlement  involved  in  this  War  must 
be  made  in  the  interest  and  for  the  benefit  of  the  populations 
concerned,  and  not  as  a  part  of  any  mere  adjustment  or  com- 
promise of  claims  among  riva;l  states;  and 

4th.  That  all  well-defined  national  aspirations  shall  be  ac- 
corded the  utmost  satisfaction  that  can  be  accorded  them  with- 
out introducing  new  or  perpetuating  old  elements  of  discord 


3S6  APPENDIX  II 

and  antagonism  that  would  be  likely  in  time  to  break  the  peace 
of  Europe,  and  consequently  of  the  world. 

3.    TERRITORIAL    QUESTIONS 

The  Conference  considers  that  the  proclamation  of  principles 
of  international  law  accepted  by  all  nations,  and  the  sub- 
stitution of  a  regular  procedure  for  the  forceful  acts  by  which 
states  calling  themselves  sovereign  have  hitherto  adjusted  their 
differences — in  short,  the  establishment  of  a  League  of  Na- 
tions— gives  an  entirely  new  aspect  to  territorial  problems. 

The  old  diplomacy  and  the  yearnings  after  domination  by 
states,  or  even  by  peoples,  which  during  the  whole  of  the  19th 
century  have  taken  advantage  of  and  corrupted  the  aspira- 
tions of  nationalities,  have  brought  Europe  to  a  condition  of 
anarchy  and  disorder  which  have  led  inevitably  to  the  present 
catastrophe. 

The  Conference  declares  it  to  be  the  duty  of  the  Labour 
and  Socialist  Movement  to  suppress  without  hesitation  the  Im- 
perialist designs  in  the  various  States  which,  even  in  this  war, 
have  led  one  Government  after  another  to  seek,  by  the  triumph 
of  military  force,  to  acquire  either  new  territories  or  economic 
advantages. 

The  establishment  of  a  system  of  international  law,  and  the 
guarantees  afforded  by  a  League  of  Nations,  ought  to  re- 
move the  last  excuse  for  those  strategic  protections  which  na- 
tions have  hitherto  felt  bound  to  require. 

It  is  the  supreme  principle  of  the  right  of  each  people  to  de- 
termine its  own  destiny  that  must  now  decide  what  steps  should 
be  taken  by  way  of  restitution  or  reparation,  and  whatever  ter- 
ritorial readjustments  may  be  found  to  be  necessary  at  the 
close  of  the  present  War. 

The  Conference  accordingly  emphasises  the  importance  to 
the  Labour  and  Socialist  Movement  of  a  clear  and  exact  defini- 
tion of  what  is  meant  by  the  right  of  each  people  to  determine 
its  own  destiny.  Neither  unity  of  race  nor  identity  of  lan- 
guage can  be  regarded  as  affording  more  than  a  presumption  in 
favour  of  federation  or  unification.  During  the  19th  century 
theories  of  this  kind  have  so  often  served  as  a  cloak  for  ag- 
gression that  the  International  cannot  but  seek  to  prevent  any 
recurrence  of  such  an  evil.     Any  adjustments  of  boundaries 


APPENDIX  II  357 

that  become  necessary  must  be  based  exclusively  upon  the 
desire  of  the  people  concerned.  • 

It  is  true  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  necessary  consultation 
of  the  desires  of  the  people  concerned  to  be  made  in  any  fixed 
and  invariable  way  for  all  the  cases  in  M^hich  it  is  required,  and 
that  the  problems  of  nationality  and  territory  are  not  the  same 
for  the  inhabitants  of  all  countries.  Nevertheless,  what  is 
necessary  in  all  cases  is  that  the  procedure  to  be  adopted 
should  be  decided,  not  by  one  of  the  parties  to  the  dispute,  but 
by  the   Supernational   Authority. 

Upon  the  basis  of  the  general  principles  herein  formulated 
the  Conference  proposes  the  following  solutions  of  particular 
problems : — 

(a)   Belgium 

The  Conference  emphatically  insists  that  a  foremost  condi- 
tion of  Peace  must  be  the  reparation  by  the  German  Govern- 
ment, under  the  direction  of  an  International  Commission,  of 
the  wrong  admittedly  done  to  Belgium ;  payment  by  that 
Government  for  all  the  damage  that  has  resulted  from  this 
wrong;  and  the  restoration  of  Belgium  as  an  independent 
Sovereign  State,  leaving  to  the  decision  of  the  Belgian  people 
the  determination  of  their  own  future  policy  in  all  respects. 

(b)  Alsace  and  Lorraine 

The  Conference  declares  that  the  problem  of  Alsace  and 
Lorraine  is  not  one  of  territorial  adjustment,  but  one  of  right, 
and  thus  an  international  problem  the  solution  of  which  is  in- 
dispensable if  Peace  is  to  be  either  just  or  lasting. 

The  Treaty  of  Frankfort  at  one  and  the  same  time  mutilated 
France  and  violated  the  right  of  the  inhabitants  of  Alsace 
and  Lorraine  to  dispose  of  their  own  destinies,  a  right  which 
they  have  repeatedly  claimed. 

The  new  Treaty  of  Peace,  in  recognising  that  Germany,  by 
her  declaration  of  war  of  1914,  has  herself  broken  the  Treaty 
of  Frankfort,  will  make  null  and  void  the  gains  of  a  brutal 
conquest  and  of  the  violence  committed  against  the  people. 

France,  having  secured  this  recognition,  can  properly  agree 
to  a  fresh  consultation  of  the  population  of  Alsace  and  Lor- 
raine as  to  its  own  desires. 

The  Treaty  of  Peace  will  bear  the  signatures  of  every  na- 


358  APPENDIX  II 

tion  in  the  world.  It  will  be  guaranteed  by  the  League  of 
Nations.  To  this  League  of  Nations  France  is  prepared  to  re- 
mit, with  the  freedom  and  integrity  of  a  popular  vote,  of  which 
the  details  can  be  subsequently  settled,  the  organisation  of  such 
a  consultation  as  shall  settle  for  ever,  as  a  matter  of  right,  the 
future  destiny  of  Alsace  and  Lorraine,  and  as  shall  finally  re- 
move from  the  common  life  of  all  Europe  a  quarrel  which  has 
imposed  so  heavy  a  burden  upon  it. 

(c)    The  Balkans 

The  Conference  lays  down  the  principle  that  all  the  violations 
and  perversions  of  the  rights  of  the  people  which  have  taken 
place,  or  are  still  taking  place,  in  the  Balkans  must  be  made  the 
subject  of  redress  or  reparation. 

Serbia,  Montenegro,  Rumania,  Albania,  and  all  the  territories 
occupied  by  military  force  should  be  evacuated  by  the  hostile 
forces.  Wherever  any  population  of  the  same  race  and  tongue 
demands  to  be  united  this  must  be  done.  Each  such  people 
must  be  accorded  full  liberty  to  settle  its  own  destiny,  without 
regard  to  the  imperialist  pretensions  of  Austria-Hungary, 
Turkey,  or  other  State. 

Accepting  this  principle,  the  Conference  proposes  that  the 
whole  problem  of  the  administrative  reorganisation  of  the 
Balkan  peoples  should  be  dealt  with  by  a  special  conference 
of  their  representatives  or  in  case  of  disagreement  by  an 
authoritative  international  commission  on  the  basis  of  (a)  the 
concession  within  each  independent  sovereignty  of  local  auton- 
omy and  security  for  the  development  of  its  particular  civilisa- 
tion of  every  racial  minority;  (b)  the  universal  guarantee  of 
freedom  of  religion  and  political  equality  for  all  races;  (c) 
a  Customs  and  Postal  Union  embracing  the  whole  of  the 
Balkan  States,  with  free  access  for  each  to  its  natural  sea- 
port; (d)  the  entry  of  all  the  Balkan  States  into  a  Federation 
for  the  concerted  arrangement  by  mutual  agreement  among 
themselves  of  all  matters  of  common  interest. 

(d)  Italy 

The  Conference  declares  its  warmest  sympathy  with  the  peo- 
ple of  Italian  blood  and  speech  who  have  been  left  outside  the 
boundaries   that   have,   as   a   result   of   the    diplomatic   agree- 


APPENDIX  II  359 

ments  of  the  past,  and  for  strategic  reasons,  been  assigned  to 
the  Kingdom  of  Italy,  and  supports  their  claim  to  be  united 
with  those  of  their  own  race  and  tongue.  It  realises  that 
arrangements  may  be  necessary  for  securing  the  legitimate  in- 
terests of  the  people  of  Italy  in  the  adjacent  seas,  but  it  con- 
demns the  aims  of  conquest  of  Italian  Imperialism,  and  believes 
that  all  legitimate  needs  can  be  safeguarded,  without  precluding 
a  like  recognition  of  the  needs  of  others  or  annexation  of  other 
people's  territories. 

Regarding  the  Italian  population  dispersed  on  the  Eastern 
shores  of  the  Adriatic,  the  relations  between  Italy  and  the 
Yugo-Slav  populations  must  be  based  on  principles  of  equity 
and  conciliation,  so  as  to  prevent  any  cause  of  future  quarrel. 

If  there  are  found  to  be  groups  of  Slavonian  race  within  the 
newly  defined  Kingdom  of  Italy,  or  groups  of  Italian  race  in 
Slavonian  territory,  mutual  guarantees  must  be  given  for  the 
assurance  of  all  of  them,  on  one  side  or  the  other,  full  liberty 
of  local  self-government  and  of  the  natural  development  of 
their  several  activities. 

(e)  Poland  and  the  Baltic  Provinces 

In  accordance  with  the  right  of  every  people  to  determine 
its  own  destinies,  Poland  must  be  reconstituted  in  unity  and 
independence  with  free  access  to  the  sea. 

The  Conference  declares  further  that  any  annexation  by 
Germany,  whether  open  or  disguised,  of  Esthonia,  Livonia, 
Courland,  or  Lithuania  would  be  a  flagrant  and  wholly  inad- 
missible  violation  of  international  law. 

(/)   The  Jews  and  Palestine 

The  Conference  demands  for  the  Jews  in  all  countries  the 
same  elementary  rights  of  freedom  of  religion,  education, 
residence  and  trade  and  equal  citizenship  that  ought  to  be 
extended  to  all  the  inhabitants  of  every  nation.  It  further 
expresses  the  opinion  that  Palestine  should  be  set  free  from 
the  harsh  and  oppressive  government  of  the  Turk,  in  order  that 
this  country  may  form  a  Free  State,  under  international  guar- 
antee, to  which  such  of  the  Jewish  people  as  desire  to  do 
so  may  return  and  may  work  out  their  own  salvation  free  from 
interference  by  those  of  alien  race  or  religion. 


36o  APPENDIX  II 

(g)  The  Problem  of  the  Turkish  Empire 

The  Conference  condemns  the  handing  back  to  the  system- 
atically violent  domination  of  the  Turkish  Government  any 
subject  people.  Thus,  whatever  may  be  proposed  with  regard 
to  Armenia,  Mesopotamia,  and  Arabia,  they  cannot  be  restored 
to  the  tyranny  of  the  Sultan  and  his  Pashas.  The  Conference 
condemns  the  Imperialist  aims  of  governments  and  capitalists 
who  would  make  of  these  and  other  territories  now  dominated 
by  the  Turkish  hordes  merely  instruments  either  of  exploita- 
tion or  militarism.  If  the  peoples  of  these  territories  do  not 
feel  themselves  able  to  settle  their  own  destinies,  the  Con- 
ference insists  that,  conformably  with  the  policy  of  "no  an- 
nexations," they  should  be  placed  for  administration  in  the 
hands  of  a  Commission  acting  under  the  Supernational  Author- 
ity or  League  of  Nations.  It  is  further  suggested  that  the 
peace  of  the  world  requires  that  the  Dardanelles  should  be 
permanently  and  effectively  neutralised  and  opened  like  all  the 
main  lines  of  marine  communication,  under  the  control  of  the 
League  of  Nations,  freely  to  all  nations  without  hindrance  or 
customs  duties. 

(h)  Austria-Hungary 

The  Conference  does  not  propose  as  a  War  Aim  dismember- 
ment of  Austria-Hungary  or  its  deprivation  of  economic  access 
to  the  sea.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Conference  cannot  admit 
that  the  claims  to  independence  made  by  the  Czecho-Slovaks 
and  the  Yugo-Slavs  must  be  regarded  merely  as  questions 
for  internal  decision.  National  independence  ought  to  be  ac- 
corded, according  to  rules  to  be  laid  down  by  the  League  of 
Nations,  to  such  peoples  as  demand  it,  and  these  communities 
ought  to  have  the  opportunity  of  determining  their  own  group- 
ings and  federations  according  to  their  affinities  and  their  in- 
terests. If  they  think  fit  they  are  free  to  substitute  a  free 
federation  of  Danubian  States  for  the  Austro-Hungarian 
Empire. 

(i)  The  Colonies  and  Dependencies 

The  International  has  always  condemned  the  Colonial  policy 
of  capitalist  governments.  Without  ceasing  to  condemn  it,  the 
Inter-Allied  Conference  nevertheless  recognises  the  existence  of 
a  state  of  things  which  it  is  obliged  to  take  into  account. 


APPENDIX  II  361 

The  Conference  considers  that  the  treaty  of  peace  ought  to 
secure  to  the  natives  in  all  colonies  and  dependencies  effective 
protection  against  the  excesses  of  capitalist  colonialism.  The 
Conference  demands  the  concession  of  administrative  autonomy 
for  all  groups  of  people  that  attain  a  certain  degree  of  civilisa- 
tion, and  for  all  others  a  progressive  participation  in  local 
government. 

The  Conference  is  of  opinion  that  the  return  of  the  colonies 
to  those  who  possessed  them  before  the  war,  or  the  exchanges 
or  compensations  which  might  be  effected,  ought  not  to  be 
an  obstacle  to  the  making  of  peace. 

Those  colonies  that  have  been  taken  by  conquest  from  any 
belligerent  must  be  made  the  subject  of  special  consideration  at 
the  Peace  Conference,  in  which  the  communities  in  their  neigh- 
bourhood will  be  entitled  to  take  part.  But  the  treaty  of  peace 
on  this  point  must  secure  economic  equality  in  such  territories 
for  the  peoples  of  all  nations,  and  thereby  guarantee  that  none 
is  shut  out  from  legitimate  access  to  raw  materials,  prevented 
from  disposing  of  its  own  products,  or  deprived  of  its  proper 
share  of  economic  development. 

As  regards  more  especially  the  colonies  of  all  the  belligerents 
in  Tropical  Africa,  from  sea  to  sea,  including  the  whole  of  the 
region  north  of  the  Zambesi  and  south  of  the  Sahara,  the 
Conference  condemns  any  imperialist  idea  which  would  make 
these  countries  the  booty  of  one  or  several  nations,  exploit  them 
for  the  profit  of  the  capitalist,  or  use  them  for  the  promotion 
of  the  militarist  aims  of  the  Governments. 

With  respect  to  these  colonies,  the  Conference  declares  in 
favour  of  a  system  of  control,  established  by  international 
agreement  under  the  League  of  Nations  and  maintained  by  its 
guarantee,  which,  whilst  respecting  national  sovereignty,  would 
be  alike  inspired  by  broad  conceptions  of  economic  freedom 
and  concerned  to  safeguard  the  rights  of  the  natives  under 
the  best  conditions  possible  for  them,  and  in  particular: — 

1.  It  would  take  account  in  each  locality  of  the  wishes 
of  the  people,  expressed  in  the  form  which  is  possible  to 
them. 

2.  The  interest  of  the  native  tribes  as  regards  the  owner- 
ship of  the  soil  would  be  maintained. 

3.  The  whole  of  the  revenues  would  be  devoted  to  the 
well-being  and  development  of  the  colonies  themselves. 


362  APPENDIX  II 

4.      ECONOMIC   RELATIONS 

The  Conference  is  of  opinion  that  the  main  lines  of  marine 
communication  should  be  open  without  hindrance  to  vessels  of 
all  nations  under  the  protection  of  the  League  of  Nations.  It 
declares  against  all  the  projects  now  being  prepared  by  Im- 
perialists and  capitalists,  not  in  any  one  country  only,  but  in 
most  countries,  for  an  Economic  War,  after  Peace  has  been 
secured,  either  against  one  or  other  foreign  nation  or  against 
all  foreign  nations,  as  such  an  Economic  War,  if  begun  by  any 
country,  would  inevitably  lead  to  reprisals,  to  which  each  nation 
in  turn  might  in  self-defence  be  driven.  The  Conference  real- 
ises that  all  attempts  at  economic  aggression,  whether  by  Pro- 
tective Tariffs  or  capitalist  trusts  or  monopolies,  inevitably 
result  in  the  spoliation  of  the  working  classes  of  the  several 
countries  for  the  profit  of  the  capitalists ;  and  the  working  class 
see  in  the  alliance  between  the  Military  Imperialists  and  the 
Fiscal  Protectionists  in  any  country  whatsoever  not  only  a 
serious  danger  to  the  prosperity  of  the  masses  of  the  people, 
but  also  a  grave  menace  to  Peace.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
right  of  each  nation  to  the  defence  of  its  own  economic  interests, 
and,  in  face  of  the  world-shortage  hereinafter  mentioned,  to  the 
conservation  for  its  own  people  of  a  sufficiency  of  its  own  sup- 
plies of  foodstuffs  and  raw  materials,  cannot  be  denied.  The 
Conference  accordingly  urges  upon  the  Labour  and  Socialist 
Parties  of  all  countries  the  importance  of  insisting,  in  the 
attitude  of  the  Government  towards  commercial  enterprise, 
along  with  the  necessary  control  of  supplies  for  its  own  people, 
on  the  principle  of  the  open  door,  and  without  hostile  discrimin- 
ation against  foreign  countries.  But  it  urges  equally  the  im- 
portance, not  merely  of  conservation,  but  also  of  the  utmost 
possible  development  by  appropriate  Government  action  of  the 
resources  of  every  country  for  the  benefit  not  only  of  its  own 
people,  but  also  of  the  world,  and  the  need  for  an  international 
agreement  for  the  enforcement  in  all  countries  of  the  legisla- 
tion on  factory  conditions,  a  maximum  eight-hour  day,  the 
prevention  of  "sweating"  and  unhealthy  trades  necessary  to 
protect  the  workers  against  exploitation  and  oppression,  and 
the  prohibition  of  night  work  by  women  and  children. 

5.      THE  PROBLEMS  OF  PEACE 

To  make  the  world  safe  for  Democracy  involves  much  more 
than  the  prevention  of  war,  either  military  or  economic.     It  will 


APPENDIX  II  363 

be  a  device  of  the  capitalist  interests  to  pretend  that  the  Treaty 
of  Peace  need  concern  itself  only  with  the  cessation  of  the 
struggles  of  the  armed  forces  and  with  any  necessary  territorial 
readjustments.  The  Conference  insists  that,  in  view  of  the 
probable  world-wide  shortage,  after  the  War,  of  exportable 
foodstuffs  and  raw  materials,  and  of  merchant  shipping,  it  is 
imperative,  in  order  to  prevent  the  most  serious  hardships,  and 
even  possible  famine,  in  one  country  or  another,  that  systematic 
arrangements  should  be  made  on  an  international  basis,  for  the 
allocation  and  conveyance  of  the  available  exportable  surpluses 
of  these  commodities  to  the  different  countries,  in  proportion, 
not  to  their  purchasing  powers,  but  to  their  several  pressing 
needs;  and  that,  within  each  country,  the  Government  must  for 
some  time  maintain  its  control  of  the  most  indispensable  com- 
modities, in  order  to  secure  their  appropriation,  not  in  a  com- 
petitive market  mainly  to  the  richer  classes  in  porportion  to 
their  means,  but,  systematically,  to  meet  the  most  urgent  needs 
of  the  whole  community  on  the  principle  of  "no  cake  for  any 
one  until  all  have  bread." 

Moreover,  it  cannot  but  be  anticipated  that,  in  all  countries, 
the  dislocation  of  industry  attendant  on  Peace,  the  instant  dis- 
charge of  millions  of  munition  makers  and  workers  in  War 
trades,  and  the  demobilisation  of  millions  of  soldiers — in  face  of 
the  scarcity  of  industrial  capital,  the  shortage  of  raw  materials, 
and  the  insecurity  of  commercial  enterprise — will,  unless  prompt 
and  energetic  action  be  taken  by  the  several  Governments, 
plunge  a  large  part  of  the  wage-earning  population  into  all  the 
miseries  of  unemployment  more  or  less  prolonged.  In  view  of 
the  fact  that  widespread  unemployment  in  any  country,  like  a 
famine,  is  an  injury  not  to  that  country  alone,  but  impoverishes 
also  the  rest  of  the  world,  the  Conference  holds  that  it  is  the 
duty  of  every  Government  to  take  immediate  action,  not  merely 
to  relieve  the  unemployed,  when  unemployment  has  set  in,  but 
actually,  so  far  as  may  be  practicable,  to  prevent  the  occurrence 
of  unemployment.  It  therefore  urges  upon  the  Labour  and 
Socialist  Parties  of  every  country  the  necessity  of  their  press- 
ing upon  their  Governments  the  preparation  of  plans  for  the 
execution  of  all  the  innumerable  public  works  (such  as  the 
making  and  repairing  of  roads,  railways,  and  waterways,  the 
erection  of  schools  and  public  buildings,  the  provision  of  work- 
ing-class dwellings,   and  the  reclamation  and  afforestation  of 


364  APPENDIX  II 

land)  that  will  be  required  in  the  near  future,  not  for  the  sake 
of  finding  measures  of  relief  for  the  unemployed,  but  with  a 
view  to  these  works  being  undertaken  at  such  a  rate  in  each 
locality  as  will  suffice,  together  with  the  various  capitalist 
enterprises  that  may  be  in  progress,  to  maintain  at  a  fairly 
uniform  level  year  by  year,  and  throughout  each  year,  the 
aggregate  demand  for  labour;  and  thus  prevent  there  being 
any  unemployed.  It  is  now  known  that  in  this  way  it  is 
quite  possible  for  any  Government  to  prevent,  if  it  chooses, 
the  occurrence  of  any  widespread  or  prolonged  involuntary  un- 
employment; which  if  it  is  now  in  any  country  allowed  to 
occur,  is  as  much  the  result  of  Government  neglect  as  is  any 
epidemic  disease. 

6.      RESTORATION  OF  THE  DEVASTATED  AREAS   AND  REPARATION   OF 
WRONGDOING 

The  Conference  holds  that  one  of  the  most  imperative  duties 
of  all  countries  immediately  Peace  is  declared  will  be  the 
restoration,  so  far  as  may  be  possible,  of  the  homes,  farms, 
factories,  public  buildings,  and  means  of  communication  wher- 
ever destroyed  by  war  operations;  that  the  restoration  should 
not  be  limited  to  compensation  for  public  buildings,  capitalist 
undertakings,  and  material  property  proved  to  be  destroyed  or 
damaged,  but  should  be  extended  to  setting  up  the  wage- 
earners  and  peasants  themselves  in  homes  and  employment ; 
and  that  to  ensure  the  full  and  impartial  application  of  these 
principles  the  assessment  and  distribution  of  the  compensation, 
so  far  as  the  cost  is  contributed  by  any  International  Fund, 
should  be  made  under  the  direction  of  an  International  Com- 
mission. 

The  Conference  will  not  be  satisfied  unless  there  is  a  full 
and  free  judicial  investigation  into  the  accusations  made  on  all 
sides  that  particular  Governments  have  ordered,  and  particular 
officers  have  exercised,  acts  of  cruelty,  oppression,  violence, 
and  theft  against  individual  victims,  for  which  no  justification 
can  be  found  in  the  ordinary  usages  of  war.  It  draws  attention, 
in  particular,  to  the  loss  of  life  and  property  of  merchant 
seamen  and  other  non-combatants  (including  women  and  chil- 
dren) resulting  from  this  inhuman  and  ruthless  conduct.  It 
should  be  part  of  the  conditions  of  Peace  that  there  should 
be  forthwith  set  up  a  Court  of  Claims  and  Accusations,  which 


APPENDIX  II  365 

should  investigate  all  such  allegations  as  may  be  brought  before 
it,  summon  the  accused  person  or  Government  to  answer  the 
complaint,  to  pronounce  judgement,  and  award  compensation  or 
damages,  payable  by  the  individual  or  Government  condemned, 
to  the  persons  who  had  suffered  wrong,  or  to  their  dependents. 
The  several  Governments  must  be  responsible,  financially  and 
otherwise,  for  the  presentation  of  the  cases  of  their  respective 
nationals  to  such  a  Court  of  Claims  and  Accusations,  and  for 
the  payment  of  the  compensation  awarded. 

» 

7.       INTERNATIONAL    CONGRESS 

The  Conference  is  of  opinion  that  an  International  Con- 
gress of  Labour  and  Socialist  organisations,  held  under  proper 
conditions,  would  at  this  stage  render  useful  service  to  world 
democracy  by  assisting  to  remove  misunderstandings  as  well  as 
the  obstacles  which  stand  in  the  way  of  world  peace. 

Awaiting  the  resumption  of  the  normal  activities  of  the 
International  Socialist  Bureau,  we  consider  that  an  Interna- 
tional Congress,  held  during  the  period  of  hostilities,  should  be 
organised  by  a  committee  whose  impartiality  cannot  be  ques- 
tioned. It  should  be  held  in  a  neutral  country,  under  such  con- 
ditions as  would  inspire  confidence  among  all  who  take  part; 
and  the  Congress  should  be  fully  representative  of  all  the 
Labour  and  Socialist  Movements  in  all  the  belligerent  countries 
accepting  the  conditions  under  which  the  Congress  is  convoked. 

As  an  essential  condition  to  an  International  Congress,  the 
Conference  is  of  opinion  that  the  organisers  of  the  Congress 
should  satisfy  themselves  that  all  the  organisations  to  be  repre- 
sented put  in  precise  form,  by  a  public  declaration,  their  peace 
terms  in  conformity  with  the  principles,  "No  annexations  or 
punitive  indemnities,  and  the  right  of  all  peoples  to  self- 
determination,"  and  that  they  are  working  with  all  their  power 
to  obtain  from  their  Governments  the  necessary  guarantees  to 
apply  these  principles  honestly  and  unreservedly  to  all  questions 
to  be  dealt  with  at  any  official  Peace  Conference. 

In  view  of  the  vital  differences  between  the  Allied  Countries 
and  the  Central  Powers,  the  Conference  is  of  opinion  that  it 
is  highly  advisable  that  the  Congress  should  be  used  to  provide 
an  opportunity  for  the  delegates  from  the  respective  countries 
now  in  a  state  of  war  to  make  a  full  and  frank  statement  of 
their  present  position  and  future  intentions,  and  to  endeavour 


366  APPENDIX  II 

by  mutual  agreement  to  arrange  a  programme  of  action  for  a 
speedy  and  democratic  peace. 

The  Conference  is  of  opinion  that  the  working  classes,  having 
made  such  sacrifices  during  the  war,  are  entitled  to  take  part 
in  securing  a  democratic  world  peace,  and  that  M.  Albert 
Thomas  (France),  M.  Emile  Vandervelde  (Belgium),  and  Mr. 
Arthur  Henderson  (Great  Britain)  be  appointed  as  a  Commis- 
sion to  secure  from  all  the  Governments  a  promise  that  at  least 
one  representative  of  Labour  and  Socialism  will  be  included 
in  the  official  representation  at  any  Government  Conference; 
and  to  organise  a  Labour  and  Socialist  Conference,  in  which 
no  country  shall  be  entitled  to  more  than  four  representatives, 
to  sit  concurrently  with  the  official  Conference. 

The  Conference  regrets  the  absence  of  American  representa- 
tives from  the  Inter-Allied  Conference,  and  urges  the  impor- 
tance of  securing  their  approval  of  the  decisions  reached.  With 
this  object  in  view  the  Conference  agrees  that  a  deputation, 
consisting  of  one  representative  from  France,  Belgium,  Italy, 
and  Great  Britain,  together  with  M.  Camille  Huysmans  (Secre- 
tary of  the  International  Socialist  Bureau),  proceed  to  the 
United  States  at  once,  in  order  to  confer  with  representatives 
of  the  American  Democracy  on  the  whole  situation  of  the  War. 

The  Conference  resolves  to  transmit  to  the  Socialists  of  the 
Central  Empires  and  of  the  nations  allied  with  them  the  Mem- 
orandum in  which  the  Conference  has  defined  the  conditions  of 
Peace,  conformably  with  the  principles  of  Socialist  and  Inter- 
national justice.  The  Conference  is  convinced  that  these 
conditions  will  commend  themselves  on  reflection  to  the  mind 
of  every  Socialist,  and  the  Conference  asks  for  the  answer 
of  the  Socialists  of  the  Central  Empires,  in  the  hope  that 
these  will  join  without  delay  in  a  joint  effort  of  the  Inter- 
national, which  has  now  become  more  than  ever  the  best  and 
the  most  certain  instrument  of  Democracy  and  Peace. 

Finally,  the  Conference  invited  the  respective  Labour  and 
Socialist  organisations  and  parties  to  demand  the  necessary 
freedom  of  propaganda,  both  written  and  oral,  in  favour  of  the 
principles  adopted  by  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist 
Conference. 


APPENDIX  HI 

THE  CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  BRITISH  LABOUR 
PARTY 

AS  ADOPTED  BY  THE  PARTY   CONFERENCE   HELD  IN   LONDON   ON 
FEBRUARY    21,     I918 


The  Labour  Party. 

2.       MEMBERSHIP 

The  Labour  Party  shall  consist  of  all  its  affiliated  organisa- 
tions/ together  with  those  men  and  women  who  are  individual 
members  of  a  Local  Labour  Party  and  who  subscribe  to  the 
Constitution  and  Programme  of  the  Party. 

3.      PARTY   OBJECTS 

National 

(a)  To  organise  and  maintain  in  Parliament  and  in  the 
country  a  Political  Labour  Party,  and  to  ensure  the  establish- 
ment of  a  Local  Labour  Party  in  every  County  Constituency 
and  every  Parliamentary  Borough,  with  suitable  divisional 
organisation  in  the  separate  constituencies  of  Divided  Bor- 
oughs. 

(&)  To  co-operate  with  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of 
the  Trades  Union  Congress,  or  other  Kindred  Organisations, 
in  joint  political  or  other  action  in  harmony  with  the  Party 
Constitution  and  Standing  Orders. 

(c)  To  give  effect  as  far  as  may  be  practicable  to  the 
principles  from  time  to  time  approved  by  the  Party  Conference. 

(d)  To  secure  for  the  producers  by  hand  or  by  brain  the 
full   fruits  of  their  industry,  and  the  most  equitable  distribu- 

*  Trade  Unions,  Socialist  Societies,  Co-operative  Societies,  Trades 
Councils,  and  Local  Labour  Parties. 

367 


368  APPENDIX  III 

tion  thereof  that  may  be  possible,  upon  the  basis  of  the  com- 
mon ownership  of  the  means  of  production  and  the  best  ob- 
tainable system  of  popular  administration  and  control  of  each 
industry  or  service. 

(e)  Generally  to  promote  the  Political,  Social,  and  Econ- 
omic Emancipation  of  the  People,  and  more  particularly  of 
those  who  depend  directly  upon  their  own  exertions  by  hand 
or  by  brain  for  the  means  of  life. 

Inter-Dominion 

(/)  To  co-operate  with  the  Labour  and  Socialist  organisa- 
tions in  the  Dominions  and  the  Dependencies  with  a  view  to 
promoting  the  purposes  of  the  Party  and  to  take  common 
action  for  the  promotion  of  a  higher  standard  of  social  and 
economic  life  for  the  working  population  of  the  respective 
countries. 

International 

(g)  To  co-operate  with  the  Labour  and  Socialist  organisa- 
tions in  other  countries  and  to  assist  in  organising  a  Federation 
of  Nations  for  the  maintenance  of  Freedom  and  Peace,  for  the 
establishment  of  suitable  machinery  for  the  adjustment  and 
settlement  of  International  Disputes  by  Conciliation  or  Judicial 
Arbitration,  and  for  such  International  Legislation  as  may  be 
practicable. 

4,      PARTY  PROGRAMME 

(a)  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Party  Conference  to  decide, 
from  time  to  time,  what  specific  proposals  of  legislative,  finan- 
cial, or  administrative  reform  shall  receive  the  general  support 
of  the  Party,  and  be  promoted,  as  occasion  may  present  itself, 
by  the  National  Executive  and  the  Parliamentary  Labour 
Party;  provided  that  no  such  proposal  shall  be  made  definitely 
part  of  the  General  Programme  of  the  Party  unless  it  has 
been  adppted  by  the  Conference  by  a  majority  of  not  less  than 
two-thirds  of  the  votes  recorded  on  a  card  vote. 

(b)  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  National  Executive  and  the 
Parliamentary  Labour  Party,  prior  to  every  General  Election, 
to  define  the  principal  issues  for  that  Election  which  in  their 
judgment  should  be  made  the  Special  Party  Programme  for 
that  particular  Election  Campaign,  which  shall  be  issued  as  a 
manifesto  by  the  Executive  to  all  constituencies  where  a  Labour 
Candidate  is  standing. 


APPENDIX  III  369 

(c)  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  Parliamentary  representa- 
tive of  the  Party  to  be  guided  by  the  decision  of  the  meetings 
of  such  Parliamentary  representatives,  with  a  view  to  giving 
effect  to  the  decisions  of  the  Party  Conferences  as  to  the 
General  Programme  of  the  Party. 

5.      THE  PARTY  CONFERENCE 

(i)  The  work  of  the  Party  shall  be  under  the  direction 
and  control  of  the  Party  Conference,  which  shall  itself  be 
subject  to  the  Constitution  and  Standing  Orders  of  the  Party. 
The  Party  Conference  shall  meet  regularly  once  in  each  year, 
and  also  at  such  other  times  as  it  may  be  convened  by  the 
National  Executive. 

(2)     The  Party  Conference  shall  be  constituted  as  follows: — 
(o)     Trade  Unions  and  other  societies  affiliated  to  the  Party 
may  send  one  delegate  for  each  thousand  members  on  which 
fees  are  paid. 

(b)  Local  Labour  Party  delegates  may  be  either  men  or 
women  resident  or  having  a  place  of  business  in  the  constitu- 
ency they  represent,  and  shall  be  appointed  as  follows: — 

In  Borough  and  County  Constituencies  returning  one  Mem- 
ber to  Parliament,  the  Local  Labour  Party  may  appoint  one 
delegate. 

In  undivided  Boroughs  returning  two  Members,  two  dele- 
gates may  be  appointed. 

In  divided  Boroughs  one  delegate  may  be  appointed  for 
each  separate  constituency  within  the  area.  The  Local  Labour 
Party  within  the  constituency  shall  nominate  and  the  Central 
Labour  Party  of  the  Divided  Borough  shall  appoint  the  dele- 
gates. In  addition  to  such  delegates,  the  Central  Labour  Party 
in  each  Divided  Borough  may  appoint  one  delegate. 

An  additional  woman  delegate  may  be  appointed  for  each 
constituency  in  which  the  number  of  affiliated  and  individual 
women  members  exceeds  500. 

(c)  Trades  Councils  under  Section  8,  clause  c,  shall  be 
entitled  to  one  delegate. 

(d)  The  members  of  the  National  Executive,  including  the 
Treasurer,  the  members  of  the  Parliamentary  Labour  Party, 
and  the  duly-sanctioned  Parliamentary  Candidates  shall  be 
ex  officio  members  of  the  Party  Conference,  but  shall,  unless 
delegates,  have  no  right  to  vote. 


370  APPENDIX  III 

6.      THE    NATIONAL    EXECUTIVE 

(o)  There  shall  be  a  National  Executive  of  the  Party  con- 
sisting of  twenty-three  members  (including  the  Treasurer) 
elected  by  the  Party  Conference  at  its  regular  Annual  Meeting, 
in  such  proportion  and  under  such  conditions  as  may  be  set 
out  in  the  Standing  Orders  for  the  time  being  in  force,  and 
this  National  Executive  shall,  subject  to  the  control  and  direc- 
tions of  the  Party  Conference,  be  the  Administrative  Authority 
of  the  Party. 

(b)  The  National  Executive  shall  be  responsible  for  the 
conduct  of  the  general  work  of  the  Party.  The  National 
Executive  shall  take  steps  to  ensure  that  the  Party  is  repre- 
sented by  a  properly  constituted  organisation  in  each  con- 
stituency in  which  this  is  found  practicable;  it  shall  give  effect 
to  the  decisions  of  the  Party  Conference ;  and  it  shall  interpret 
the  Constitution  and  Standing  Orders  and  Rules  of  the  Party 
in  all  cases  of  dispute  subject  to  an  appeal  to  the  next  regular 
Annual  Meeting  of  the  Party  Conference  by  the  organisation 
or  person  concerned. 

(c)  The  National  Executive  shall  confer  with  the  Parlia- 
mentary Labour  Party  at  the  opening  of  each  Parliamentary 
Session,  and  also  at  any  other  time  when  the  National  Execu- 
tive or  the  Parliamentary  Party  may  desire  such  conference, 
on  any  matters  relating  to  the  work  and  progress  of  the  Party, 
or  to  the  efforts  necessary  to  give  effect  to  the  General  Pro- 
gramme of  the  Party. 

7.      PARLIAMENTARY  CANDIDATES 

(a)  The  National  Executive  shall  co-operate  with  the  Local 
Labour  Party  in  any  constituency  with  a  view  to  nominating 
a  Labour  Candidate  at  any  Parliamentary  General  or  Bye- 
Election.  Before  any  Parliamentary  Candidate  can  be  regarded 
as  finally  adopted  for  a  constituency  as  a  Candidate  of  the 
Labour  Party,  his  candidature  must  be  sanctioned  by  the 
National  Executive. 

(b)  Candidates  approved  by  the  National  Executive  shall 
appear  before  their  constituencies  under  the  designation  of 
"Labour  Candidate"  only.  At  any  General  Election  they  shall 
include  in  their  Election  Addresses  and  give  prominence  in 
their  campaigns  to  the  issues  for  that  Election  as  defined  by  the 
National  Executive  from  the  General  Party  Programme.     If 


APPENDIX  III  371 

they  are  elected  they  shall  act  in  harmony  with  the  Constitution 
and  Standing  Orders  of  the  Party  in  seeking  to  discharge  the 
responsibilities  established  by  Parliamentary  practise. 

(c)  Party  Candidates  shall  receive  financial  assistance  for 
election  expenditure  from  the  Party  funds  on  the  following 
basis : — 

Borough  Constituencies,  £1  per  1,000  electors. 

County  Divisions,  £1  15s.  per  1,000  electors. 

8.      AFFILIATION   FEES 

(i)  Trade  Unions,  Socialist  Societies,  Co-operative  Soci- 
eties, and  other  organisations  directly  affiliated  to  the  Party 
(but  not  being  affiliated  Local  Labour  Parties  or  Trades  Coun- 
cils) shall  pay  2d.  per  member  per  annum  to  the  Central  Party 
Funds  with  a  minimum  of  30s. 

The  membership  of  a  Trade  Union  for  the  purpose  of  this 
clause  shall  be  those  members  contributing  to  the  political  fund 
of  the  Union  established  under  the  Trade  Union  Act,  1913. 

(2)  The  affiliation  of  Trades  Councils  will  be  subject  to  the 
following  conditions : — 

(0)  Where  Local  Labour  Parties  and  Trades  Councils  at  pres- 
ent exist  in  the  same  area  every  effort  must  be  made  to  amalga- 
mate these  bodies,  retaining  in  one  organisation  the  industrial  and 
political  functions,  and  incorporating  the  constitution  and  rules  for 
Local  Labour  Parties  in  the  rules  of  the  amalgamated  body. 

(b)  Where  no  Local  Labour  Party  is  in  existence  and  the 
Trades  Council  is  discharging  the  political  functions,  such  Trades 
Council  shall  be  eligible  for  affiliation  as  a  Local  Labour  Party, 
providing  that  its  rules  and  title  be  extended  so  as  to  include  Local 
Labour  Party  functions. 

(c)  Where  a  Local  Labour  Party  and  a  Trades  Council  exist 
in  the  same  area,  the  Trades  Council  shall  be  eligible  to  be  affili- 
ated to  the  Local  Labour  Party,  but  not  to  the  National  Party, 
except  in  such  cases  where  the  Trades  Council  was  aiBliated  to 
the  National  Party  prior  to  November  ist,  1917.  In  these  cases 
the  Executive  Committee  shall  have  power  to  continue  national 
affiliations  on  such  conditions  as  may  be  deemed  necessary. 

(d)  Trades  Councils  included  under  Section  (c)  shall  pay  an 
annual  affiliation   fee  of  30s. 

Local  Labour  Parties  must  charge  individually  enrolled  mem- 
bers, male  a  minimum  of  is.  per  annum,  female  6d.  per  annum; 
and  2d.  per  member  so  collected  must  be  remitted  to  the  Cen- 
tral Office  with  a  minimum  of  30s.,  as  the  affiliation  fee  of 
such  Local  Labour  Party. 

In  addition  to  these  payments,  a  delegation  fee  of  5s.  to  the 
Party  Conference  or  any  Special  Conference  may  be  charged. 


APPENDIX  IV 
LABOUR  AND  THE  NEW  SOCIAL  ORDER 

A  DRAFT  REPORT  ON  RECONSTRUCTION  SUBMITTED  BY  THE  EXECU- 
TIVE COMMITTEE  OF  THE  BRITISH  LABOUR  PARTY  AT  THE  I7TH 
ANNUAL  CONFERENCE,   NOTTINGHAM,   JAN.  23-25,    I918 

It  behooves  the  Labour  Party,  in  formulating  its  own  pro- 
gramme for  Reconstruction  after  the  war,  and  in  criticising 
the  various  preparations  and  plans  that  are  being  made  by 
the  present  Government,  to  look  at  the  problem  as  a  whole. 
We  have  to  make  clear  what  it  is  that  we  wish  to  construct. 
It  is  important  to  emphasise  the  fact  that,  whatever  may  be  the 
case  with  regard  to  other  political  parties,  our  detailed  prac- 
tical proposals  proceed  from  definitely  held  principles. 

THE   END  OF  A  CIVILISATION 

We  need  to  beware  of  patchwork.  The  view  of  the  Labour 
Party  is  that  what  has  to  be  reconstructed  after  the  war  is  not 
this  or  that  Government  Department,  or  this  or  that  piece  of 
social  machinery;  but,  so  far  as  Britain  is  concerned,  society 
itself.  The  individual  worker,  or  for  that  matter  the  individual 
statesman,  immersed  in  daily  routine — like  the  individual  sol- 
dier in  a  battle — easily  fails  to  understand  the  magnitude  and 
far-reaching  importance  of  what  is  taking  place  around  him. 
How  does  it  fit  together  as  a  whole?  How  does  it  look  from 
a  distance?  Count  Okuma,  one  of  the  oldest,  most  experienced 
and  ablest  of  the  statesmen  of  Japan,  watching  the  present  con- 
flict from  the  other  side  of  the  globe,  declares  it  to  be  nothing 
less  than  the  death  of  European  civilisation.  Just  as  in  the 
past  the  civilisations  of  Babylon,  Egypt,  Greece,  Carthage  and 
the  great  Roman  Empire  have  been  successively  destroyed,  so, 
in  the  judgment  of  this  detached  observer,  the  civilisation  of  all 
Europe   is   even   now    receiving   its   death-blow.    We   of   the 

372 


APPENDIX  IV  373 

Labour  Party  can  so  far  agree  in  this  estimate  as  to  recognise, 
in  the  present  world  catastrophe,  if  not  the  death,  in  Europe, 
of  civiHsation  itself,  at  any  rate  the  culmination  and  collapse  of 
a  distinctive  industrial  civilisation,  which  the  workers  will  not 
seek  to  reconstruct.  At  such  times  of  crisis  it  is  easier  to  slip 
into  ruin  than  to  progress  into  higher  forms  of  organisation. 
That  is  the  problem  as  it  presents  itself  to  the  Labour  Party 
to-day. 

What  this  war  is  consuming  is  not  merely  the  security,  the 
homes,  the  livelihood  and  the  lives  of  millions  of  innocent 
families,  and  an  enormous  proportion  of  all  the  accumulated 
wealth  of  the  world,  but  also  the  very  basis  of  the  peculiar 
social  order  in  which  it  has  arisen.  The  individualist  system 
of  capitalist  production,  based  on  the  private  ownership  and 
competitive  administration  of  land  and  capital,  with  its  reck- 
less "profiteering"  and  wage  slavery;  with  its  glorification  of  the 
unhampered  struggle  for  the  means  of  life  and  its  hypocritical 
pretence  of  the  "survival  of  the  fittest";  with  the  monstrous 
inequality  of  circumstances  which  it  produces  and  the  degrada- 
tion and  brutalisation,  both  moral  and  spiritual,  resulting  there- 
from, may,  we  hope,  indeed  have  received  a  death-blow. 
With  it  must  go  the  political  system  and  ideas  in  which  it 
naturally  found  expression.  We  of  the  Labour  Party,  whether 
in  opposition  or  in  due  time  called  upon  to  form  an  Administra- 
tion, will  certainly  lend  no  hand  to  its  revival.  On  the  contrary, 
we  shall  do  our  utmost  to  see  that  it  is  buried  with  the  millions 
whom  it  has  done  to  death.  If  we  in  Britain  are  to  escape 
from  the  decay  of  civilisation  itself,  which  the  Japanese  states- 
man foresees,  we  must  ensure  that  what  is  presently  to  be  built 
up  is  a  new  social  order,  based  not  on  fighting  but  on  fraternity 
— not  on  the  competitive  struggle  for  the  means  of  bare  life, 
but  on  a  deliberately  planned  co-operation  in  production  and 
distribution  for  the  benefit  of  all  who  participate  by  hand 
or  by  brain — not  on  the  utmost  possible  inequality  of  riches, 
but  on  a  systematic  approach  towards  a  healthy  equality  of 
material  circumstances  for  every  person  born  into  the  world — 
not  on  an  enforced  dominion  over  subject  nations,  subject  races, 
subject  Colonies,  subject  classes,  or  a  subject  sex,  but,  in 
industry  as  well  as  in  government,  on  that  equal  freedom, 
that  general  consciousness  of  consent,  and  that  widest  possible 
participation  in  power,  both  economic  and  political,  which  is 
characteristic  of  Democracy.    We  do  not,  of  course,  pretend 


374  APPENDIX  IV 

that  it  is  possible,  even  after  the  drastic  clearing  away  that 
is  now  going  on,  to  build  society  anew  in  a  year  or  two  of 
feverish  "Reconstruction."  What  the  Labour  Party  intends 
to  satisfy  itself  about  is  that  each  brick  that  it  helps  to  lay 
shall  go  to  erect  the  structure  that  it  intends,  and  no  other. 

THE  PILLARS   OF  THE   HOUSE 

We  need  not  here  recapitulate,  one  by  one,  the  different  items 
in  the  Labour  Party's  programme,  which  successive  Party 
Conferences  have  adopted.  These  proposals,  some  of  them 
in  various  publications  worked  out  in  practical  detail,  are  often 
carelessly  derided  as  impracticable,  even  by  the  politicians  who 
steal  them  piecemeal  from  us !  The  members  of  the  Labour 
Party,  themselves  actually  working  by  hand  or  by  brain,  in 
close  contact  with  the  facts,  have  perhaps  at  all  times  a  more 
accurate  appreciation  of  what  is  practicable,  in  industry  as  in 
politics,  than  those  who  depend  solely  on  academic  instruction 
or  are  biased  by  great  possessions.  But  to-day  no  man  dares 
to  say  that  anything  is  impracticable.  The  war,  which  has 
scared  the  old  Political  Parties  right  out  of  their  dogmas,  has 
taught  every  statesman  and  every  Government  official,  to  his 
enduring  surprise,  how  very  much  more  can  be  done  along  the 
lines  that  we  have  laid  down  than  he  had  ever  before  thought 
possible.  What  we  now  promulgate  as  our  policy,  whether  for 
opposition  or  for  office,  is  not  merely  this  or  that  specific  reform, 
but  a  deliberately  thought  out,  systematic,  and  comprehensive 
plan  for  that  immediate  social  rebuilding  which  any  Ministry, 
whether  or  not  it  desires  to  grapple  with  the  problem,  will  be 
driven  to  undertake.  The  Four  Pillars  of  the  House  that  we 
propose  to  erect,  resting  upon  the  common  foundation  of  the 
Democratic  control  of  society  in  all  its  activities,  may  be  termed, 
respectively : 

(o)  The  Universal  Enforcement  of  the  National  Minimum; 

(b)  The  Democratic  Control  of  Industry; 

(c)  The  Revolution  in  National  Finance;  and 

(d)  The  Surplus  Wealth  for  the  Common  Good. 

The  various  detailed  proposals  of  the  Labour  Party,  herein 
briefly  summarised,  rest  on  these  four  pillars,  and  can  best 
be  appreciated  in  connection  with  them. 


APPENDIX  ly  375 

THE   UNIVERSAL   ENFORCEMENT  OF   A   NATIONAL    MINIMUM 

The  first  principle  of  the  Labour  Party — in  significant  con- 
trast with  those  of  the  Capitalist  System,  whether  expressed  by 
the  Liberal  or  by  the  Conservative  Party — is  the  securing  to 
every  member  of  the  community,  in  good  times  and  bad  alike 
(and  not  only  to  the  strong  and  able,  the  well-born  or  the 
fortunate),  of  all  the  requisites  of  healthy  life  and  worthy 
citizenship.  This  is  in  no  sense  a  "class"  proposal.  Such  an 
amount  of  social  protection  of  the  individual,  however  poor 
and  lowly,  from  birth  to  death,  is,  as  the  economist  now  knows, 
as  indispensable  to  fruitful  co-operation  as  it  is  to  successful 
combination ;  and  it  affords  the  only  complete  safeguard  against 
that  insidious  Degradation  of  the  Standard  of  Life,  which  is 
the  worst  economic  and  social  calamity  to  which  any  commu- 
nity can  be  subjected.  We  are  members  one  of  another.  No 
man  liveth  to  himself  alone.  If  any,  even  the  humblest,  is 
made  to  suffer,  the  whole  community  and  every  one  of  us, 
whether  or  not  we  recognise  the  fact,  is  thereby  injured.  Gener- 
ation after  generation  tliis  has  been  the  corner-stone  of  the 
faith  of  Labour.  It  will  be  the  guiding  principle  of  any 
Labour  Government. 

The  Legislative  Regulation  of  Employment 

Thus  it  is  that  the  Labour  Party  to-day  stands  for  the  uni- 
versal application  of  the  Policy  of  the  National  Minimum,  to 
which  (as  embodied  in  the  successive  elaborations  of  the 
Factory,  Mines,  Railways,  Shops,  Merchant  Shipping,  and 
Truck  Acts,  the  Public  Health,  Housing,  and  Education  Acts 
and  the  Minimum  Wage  Act — all  of  them  aiming  at  the  enforce- 
ment of  at  least  the  prescribed  Minimum  of  Leisure,  Health, 
Education,  and  Subsistence)  the  spokesmen  of  Labour  have 
already  gained  the  support  of  the  enlightened  statesmen  and 
economists  of  the  world.  All  these  laws  purporting  to  pro- 
tect against  extreme  Degradation  of  the  Standard  of  Life  need 
considerable  improvement  and  extension,  whilst  their  adminis- 
tration leaves  much  to  be  desired.  For  instance,  the  Work- 
men's Compensation  Act  fails,  shamefully,  not  merely  to  secure 
proper  provision  for  all  the  victims  of  accident  and  industrial 
disease,  but  what  is  much  more  important,  does  not  succeed  in 
preventing  their  continual  increase.     The  amendment  and  con- 


376  APPENDIX  IV 

solidation  of  the  Factories  and  Workshops  Acts,  with  their 
extension  to  all  employed  persons,  is  long  overdue,  and  it  will 
be  the  policy  of  Labour  greatly  to  strengthen  the  staff  of 
inspectors,  especially  by  the  addition  of  more  men  and  women 
of  actual  experience  of  the  workshop  and  the  mine.  The  Coal 
Mines  (Minimum  Wage)  Act  must  certainly  be  maintained  in 
force,  and  suitably  amended,  so  as  both  to  ensure  greater  uni- 
formity of  conditions  among  the  several  districts,  and  to  make 
the  District  Minimum  in  all  cases  an  effective  reality.  The 
same  policy  will,  in  the  interests  of  the  agricultural  labourers, 
dictate  the  perpetuation  of  the  Legal  Wage  clauses  of  the  new 
Corn  Law  just  passed  for  a  term  of  five  years,  and  the  prompt 
amendment  of  any  defects  that  may  be  revealed  in  their  work- 
ing. And,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  many  millions  of  wage- 
earners,  notably  women  and  the  less  skilled  workmen  in  various 
occupations,  are  unable  by  combination  to  obtain  wages  adequate 
for  decent  maintenance  in  health,  the  Labour  Party  intends 
to  see  to  it  that  the  Trade  Boards  Act  is  suitably  amended  and 
made  to  apply  to  all  industrial  employments  in  which  any  con- 
siderable number  of  those  employed  obtain  less  than  30s.  per 
week.  This  minimum  of  not  less  than  30s.  per  week  (which 
will  need  revision  according  to  the  level  of  prices)  ought  to  be 
the  very  lowest  statutory  base  line  for  the  least  skilled  adult 
workers,  men  or  women,  in  any  occupation,  in  all  parts  of 
the  United  Kingdom. 

The  Organisation  of  Demobilisation 

But  the  coming  industrial  dislocation,  which  will  inevitably 
follow  the  discharge  from  war  service  of  half  of  all  the  work- 
ing population,  imposes  new  obligations  upon  the  community. 
The  demobilisation  and  discharge  of  the  eight  million  wage- 
earners  now  being  paid  from  public  funds,  either  for  service 
with  the  Colours  or  in  munition  work  and  other  war  trades,  will 
bring  to  the  whole  wage-earning  class  grave  peril  of  Unem- 
ployment, Reduction  of  Wages,  and  a  lasting  Degradation  of 
the  Standard  of  Life,  which  can  be  prevented  only  by  deliberate 
National  Organisation.  The  Labour  Party  has  repeatedly  called 
upon  the  present  Government  to  formulate  its  plan,  and  to 
make  in  advance  all  arrangements  necessary  for  coping  with 
so  unparalleled  a  dislocation.  The  policy  to  which  the  Labour 
Party  commits  itself  is  unhesitating  and  uncompromising.     It 


APPENDIX  IV  377 

is  plain  that  regard  should  be  had,  in  stopping  Government 
orders,  reducing  the  staff  of  the  National  Factories  and  demo- 
bilising the  Army,  to  the  actual  state  of  employment  in  par- 
ticular industries  and  in  different  districts,  so  as  both  to 
release  first  the  kinds  of  labour  most  urgently  required  for  the 
revival  of  peace  production,  and  to  prevent  any  congestion  of 
the  market.  It  is  no  less  imperative  that  suitable  provision 
against  being  turned  suddenly  adrift  without  resources  should 
be  made,  not  only  for  the  soldiers,  but  also  for  the  three  mil- 
lion operatives  in  munition  work  and  other  war  trades,  who  will 
be  discharged  long  before  most  of  the  Army  can  be  dis- 
banded. On  this  important  point,  which  is  the  most  urgent 
of  all,  the  present  Government  has,  we  believe,  down  to  the 
present  hour,  formulated  no  plan,  and  come  to  no  decision, 
and  neither  the  Liberal  nor  the  Conservative  Party  has  ap- 
parently deemed  the  matter  worthy  of  agitation.  Any  Govern- 
ment which  should  allow  the  discharged  soldier  or  munition 
worker  to  fall  into  the  clutches  of  charity  or  the  Poor  Law 
would  have  to  be  instantly  driven  from  office  by  an  outburst 
of  popular  indignation.  What  every  one  of  them  who  is  not 
wholly  disabled  will  look  for  is  a  situation  in  accordance  with 
his  capacity. 

Securing  Employment  for  All 

The  Labour  Party  insists — as  no  other  political  party  has 
thought  fit  to  do — that  the  obligation  to  find  suitable  employment 
in  productive  work  for  all  these  men  and  women  rests  upon 
the  Government  for  the  time  being.  The  work  of  re-settling 
the  disbanded  soldiers  and  discharged  munition  workers  into 
new  situations  is  a  national  obligation;  and  the  Labour  Party 
emphatically  protests  against  it  being  regarded  as  a  matter  for 
private  charity.  It  strongly  objects  to  this  public  duty  being 
handed  over  either  to  committees  of  philanthropists  or  benevo- 
lent societies,  or  to  any  of  the  military  or  recruiting  authorities. 
The  policy  of  the  Labour  Party  in  this  matter  is  to  make  the 
utmost  use  of  the  Trade  Unions,  and,  equally  for  the  brain- 
workers,  of  the  various  Professional  Associations.  In  view  of 
the  fact  that,  in  any  trade,  the  best  organisation  for  placing 
men  in  situations  is  a  national  Trade  Union  having  local 
Branches  throughout  the  kingdom,  every  soldier  should  be  al- 
lowed, if  he  chooses,  to  have  a  duplicate  of  his  industrial  dis- 
charge notice  sent,  one  month  before  the  date  fixed   for  his 


378  APPENDIX  IV 

discharge,  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Trade  Union  to  which  he 
belongs  or  wishes  to  belong.  Apart  from  this  use  of  the  Trade 
Union  (and  a  corresponding  use  of  the  Professional  Associa- 
tion) the  Government  must,  of  course,  avail  itself  of  some  such 
public  machinery  as  that  of  the  Employment  Exchanges ;  but 
before  the  existing  Exchanges  (which  will  need  to  be  greatly 
extended)  can  receive  the  co-operation  and  support  of  the 
organised  Labour  Movement,  without  which  their  operations 
can  never  be  fully  successful,  it  is  imperative  that  they  should 
be  drastically  reformed,  on  the  lines  laid  down  in  the  Demo- 
bilisation Report  of  the  "Labour  After  the  War"  Joint  Com- 
mittee; and,  in  particular,  that  each  Exchange  should  be 
placed  effectively  under  the  supervision  and  control  of  a  Joint 
Committee  of  Employers  and  Trade  Unionists  in  equal  num- 
bers. 

The  responsibility  of  the  Government  for  the  time  being, 
in  the  grave  industrial  crisis  that  demobilisation  will  produce, 
goes,  however,  far  beyond  the  eight  million  men  and  women 
whom  the  various  Departments  will  suddenly  discharge  from 
their  own  service.  The  effect  of  this  peremptory  discharge  on 
all  the  other  workers  has  also  to  be  taken  into  account.  To 
the  Labour  Party  it  will  seem  the  supreme  concern  of  the 
Government  of  the  day  to  see  to  it  that  there  shall  be,  as  a 
result  of  the  gigantic  "General  Post"  which  it  will  itself 
have  deliberately  set  going,  nowhere  any  Degradation  of  the 
Standard  of  Life.  The  Government  has  pledged  itself  to  re- 
store the  Trade  Union  conditions  and  "pre-war  practices"  of 
the  workshop,  which  the  Trade  Unions  patriotically  gave  up  at 
the  direct  request  of  the  Government  itself;  and  this  solemn 
pledge  must  be  fulfilled,  of  course,  in  the  spirit  as  well  as  in  the 
letter.  The  Labour  Party,  moreover,  holds  it  to  be  the  duty 
of  the  Government  of  the  day  to  take  all  necessary  steps  to 
prevent  the  Standard  Rates  of  Wages,  in  any  trade  or  occupa- 
tion whatsoever,  from  suffering  any  reduction,  relatively  to  the 
contemporary  cost  of  living.  Unfortunately,  the  present  Gov- 
ernment, like  the  Liberal  and  Conservative  Parties,  so  far  re- 
fuses to  speak  on  this  important  matter  with  any  clear  voice. 
We  claim  that  it  should  be  a  cardinal  point  of  Government 
policy  to  make  it  plain  to  every  capitalist  employer  that  any 
attempt  to  reduce  the  customary  rates  of  wages  when  peace 
comes,  or  to  take  advantage  of  the  dislocation  of  demobilisa- 
tion  to  worsen   the   conditions   of   employment   in   any  grade 


APPENDIX  IV  379 

whatsoever,  will  certainly  lead  to  embittered  industrial  strife, 
which  will  be  in  the  highest  degree  detrimental  to  the  national 
interests ;  and  that  the  Government  of  the  day  will  not  hesitate 
to  take  all  necessary  steps  to  avert  such  a  calamity.  In  the 
great  impending  crisis  the  Government  of  the  day  should  not 
only,  as  the  greatest  employer  of  both  brainworkers  and  manual 
workers,  set  a  good  example  in  this  respect,  but  should  also 
actively  seek  to  influence  private  employers  by  proclaiming  in 
advance  that  it  will  not  itself  attempt  to  lower  the  Standard 
Rates  of  conditions  in  public  employment;  by  announcing  that 
it  will  insist  on  the  most  rigorous  observance  of  the  Fair 
Wages  Clause  in  all  public  contracts,  and  by  explicitly  recom- 
mending every  Local  Authority  to  adopt  the  same  policy. 

But  nothing  is  more  dangerous  to  the  Standard  of  Life,  or  so 
destructive  of  those  minimum  conditions  of  healthy  existence, 
which  must  in  the  interests  of  the  community  be  assured  to 
every  worker,  than  any  widespread  or  continued  unemployment. 
It  has  always  been  a  fundamental  principle  of  the  Labour 
Party  (a  point  on  which,  significantly  enough,  it  has  not  been 
followed  by  either  of  the  other  political  parties),  that,  in  a 
modern  industrial  community,  it  is  one  of  the  foremost  obliga- 
tions of  the  Government  to  find,  for  every  willing  worker, 
whether  by  hand  or  by  brain,  productive  work  at  Standard 
Rates. 

It  is  accordingly  the  duty  of  the  Government  to  adopt  a  policy 
of  deliberately  and  systematically  preventing  the  occurrence 
of  unemployment,  instead  of  (as  heretofore)  letting  unemploy- 
ment occur,  and  then  seeking,  vainly  and  expensively,  to  relieve 
the  unemployed.  It  is  now  known  that  the  Government  can, 
if  it  chooses,  arrange  the  public  works  and  the  orders  of 
National  Departments  and  Local  Authorities  in  such  a  way  as 
to  maintain  the  aggregate  demand  for  labour  in  the  whole  king- 
dom (including  that  of  capitalist  employers)  approximately  at  a 
uniform  level  from  year  to  year;  and  it  is  therefore  a  primary 
obligation  of  the  Government  to  prevent  any  considerable  or 
widespread  fluctuations  in  the  total  numbers  employed  in  times 
of  good  or  bad  trade.  But  this  is  not  all.  In  order  to  prepare 
for  the  possibility  of  there  being  any  unemployment,  either 
in  the  course  of  demobilisation  or  in  the  first  years  of  peace, 
it  is  essential  that  the  Government  should  make  all  necessary 
preparations  for  putting  instantly  in  hand,  directly  or  through 
the  Local  Authorities,  such  urgently  needed  public  works  as 


38o  APPENDIX  IV 

(o)  the  rehousing  of  the  population  alike  in  rural  districts, 
mining  villages,  and  town  slums,  to  the  extent,  possibly,  of  a 
million  new  cottages  and  an  outlay  of  300  millions  sterling;  (b) 
the  immediate  making-good  of  the  shortage  of  schools,  training 
colleges,  technical  colleges,  &c.,  and  the  engagement  of  the 
necessary  additional  teaching,  clerical,  and  administrative  staffs ; 
(c)  new  roads;  (d)  light  railways;  (e)  the  unification  and  re- 
organisation of  the  railway  and  canal  system;  (/)  afforestation; 
(g)  the  reclamation  of  land;  (h)  the  development  and  better 
equipment  of  our  ports  and  harbours;  (i)  the  opening  of  access 
to  land  by  co-operative  small  holdings  and  in  other  practicable 
ways.  Moreover,  in  order  to  relieve  any  pressure  of  an  over- 
stocked labour  market,  the  opportunity  should  be  taken,  if  un- 
employment should  threaten  to  become  widespread,  (o)  im- 
mediately to  raise  the  school-leaving  age  to  sixteen;  (b)  greatly 
to  increase  the  number  of  scholarships  and  bursaries  for  Sec- 
ondary and  Higher  Education;  and  (c)  substantially  to  shorten 
the  hours  of  labour  of  all  young  persons,  even  to  a  greater 
extent  than  the  eight  hours  per  week  contemplated  in  the  new 
Education  Bill,  in  order  to  enable  them  to  attend  technical  and 
other  classes  in  the  daytime.  Finally,  wherever  practicable, 
the  hours  of  adult  labour  should  be  reduced  to  not  more  than 
forty-eight  per  week,  without  reduction  of  the  Standard  Rates 
of  Wages.  There  can  be  no  economic  or  other  justification 
for  keeping  any  man  or  woman  to  work  for  long  hours,  or  at 
overtime,  whilst  others  are  unemployed. 

Social  Insurance  against  Unemployment 

In  so  far  as  the  Government  fails  to  prevent  Unemployment 
— whenever  it  finds  it  impossible  to  discover  for  any  willing 
worker,  man  or  woman,  a  suitable  situation  at  the  Standard 
Rate— the  Labour  Party  holds  that  the  Government  must,  in 
the  interest  of  the  community  as  a  whole,  provide  him  or  her 
with  adequate  maintenance,  either  with  such  arrangements  for 
honourable  employment  or  with  such  useful  training  as  may  be 
found  practicable,  according  to  age,  health  and  previous  occupa- 
tion. In  many  ways  the  best  form  of  provision  for  those  who 
must  be  unemployed,  because  the  industrial  organisation  of  the 
community  so  far  breaks  down  as  to  be  temporarily  unable  to 
set  them  to  work,  is  the  Out  of  Work  Benefit  afforded  by  a 
well-administered  Trade  Union.     This  is  a  special  tax  on  the 


APPENDIX  IV  381 

Trade  Unionists  themselves  which  they  have  voluntarily  un- 
dertaken, but  towards  which  they  have  a  right  to  claim  a  pub- 
lic subvention — a  subvention  which  was  actually  granted  by 
Parliament  (though  only  to  the  extent  of  a  couple  of  shillings  or 
so  per  week)  under  Part  II.  of  the  Insurance  Act.  The  ar- 
bitrary withdrawal  by  the  Government  in  191 5  of  this  statutory 
right  of  the  Trade  Unions  was  one  of  the  least  excusable  of 
the  war  economies;  and  the  Labour  Party  must  insist  on  the 
resumption  of  this  subvention  immediately  the  war  ceases,  and 
on  its  increase  to  at  least  half  the  amount  spent  in  Out  of 
Work  Benefit.  The  extension  of  State  Unemployment  Insur- 
ance to  other  occupations  may  afford  a  convenient  method  of  pro- 
viding for  such  of  the  Unemployed,  especially  in  the  case  of 
badly  paid  women  workers  and  the  less  skilled  men,  whom  it  is 
difficult  to  organise  in  Trade  Unions.  But  the  weekly  rate  of  the 
State  Unemployment  Benefit  needs,  in  these  days  of  high  prices, 
to  be  considerably  raised;  whilst  no  industry  ought  to  be  com- 
pulsorily  brought  within  its  scope  against  the  declared  will  of 
the  workers  concerned,  and  especially  of  their  Trade  Unions.  In 
one  way  or  another  remunerative  employment  or  honourable 
maintenance  must  be  found  for  every  willing  worker,  by  hand 
or  by  brain,  in  bad  times  as  well  as  in  good.  It  is  clear  that, 
in  the  twentieth  century,  there  must  be  no  question  of  driving 
the  Unemployed  to  anything  so  obsolete  and  discredited  as 
either  private  charity,  with  its  haphazard  and  ill-considered 
doles,  or  the  Poor  Law,  with  the  futilities  and  barbarities  of  its 
"Stone  Yard,"  or  its  "Able-bodied  Test  Workhouse."  Only 
on  the  basis  of  a  universal  application  of  the  Policy  of  the 
National  Minimum,  affording  complete  security  against  desti- 
tution, in  sickness  and  health,  in  good  times  and  bad  alike,  to 
every  member  of  the  community  of  whatever  age  or  sex,  can 
any  worthy  social  order  be  built  up. 

THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONTROL  OF  INDUSTRY 

The  universal  application  of  the  Policy  of  the  National  Mini- 
mum is,  of  course,  only  the  first  of  the  Pillars  of  the  House 
that  the  Labour  Party  intends  to  see  built.  What  marks  off  this 
Party  most  distinctively  from  any  of  the  other  political  parties 
is  its  demand  for  the  full  and  genuine  adoption  of  the  principle 
of  Democracy.  The  first  condition  of  Democracy  is  ef- 
fective   personal    freedom.      This    has    suffered    so    many   en- 


382  APPENDIX  IV 

croachments  during  the  war  that  it  is  necessary  to  state  with 
clearness  that  the  complete  removal  of  all  the  war-time  re- 
strictions on  freedom  of  speech,  freedom  of  publication,  free- 
dom of  the  press,  freedom  of  travel  and  freedom  of  choice  of 
place  of  residence  and  kind  of  employment  must  take  place 
the  day  after  Peace  is  declared.  The  Labour  Party  declares 
emphatically  against  any  continuance  of  the  Military  Service 
Acts  a  moment  longer  than  the  imperative  requirements  of 
the  war  excuse.  But  individual  freedom  is  of  little  use  with- 
out complete  political  rights.  The  Labour  Party  sees  its  re- 
peated demands  largely  conceded  in  the  present  Representa- 
tion of  the  People  Act,  but  not  yet  wholly  satisfied.  The 
Party  stands,  as  heretofore,  for  complete  Adult  Suffrage,  with 
not  more  than  a  three  months'  residential  qualification,  for 
effective  provisions  for  absent  electors  to  vote,  for  absolutely 
equal  rights  for  both  sexes,  for  the  same  freedom  to  exercise 
civic  rights  for  the  "common  soldier"  as  for  the  officer,  for 
Shorter  Parliaments,  for  the  complete  Abolition  of  the  House 
of  Lords,  and  for  a  most  strenuous  opposition  to  any  new 
Second  Chamber,  whether  elected  or  not,  having  in  it  any  ele- 
ment of  Heredity  or  Privilege,  or  of  the  control  of  the  House 
of  Commons  by  any  Party  or  Class.  But  unlike  the  Conserva- 
tive and  Liberal  Parties,  the  Labour  Party  insists  on  Democ- 
racy in  industry  as  well  as  in  government.  It  demands  the 
progressive  elimination  from  the  control  of  industry  of  the 
private  capitalist,  individual  or  joint-stock;  and  the  setting 
free  of  all  who  work,  whether  by  hand  or  by  brain,  for  the 
service  of  the  community,  and  of  the  community  only.  And 
the  Labour  Party  refuses  absolutely  to  believe  that  the  British 
people  will  permanently  tolerate  any  reconstruction  or  perpetua- 
tion of  the  disorganisation,  waste  and  inefficiency  involved  in 
the  abandonment  of  British  industry  to  a  jostling  crowd  of 
separate  private  employers,  with  their  minds  bent,  not  on  the 
service  of  the  community,  but — by  the  very  law  of  their  be- 
ing— only  on  the  utmost  possible  profiteering.  What  the  nation 
needs  is  undoubtedly  a  great  bound  onward  in  its  aggregate 
productivity.  But  this  cannot  be  secured  merely  by  pressing 
the  manual  workers  to  more  strenuous  toil,  or  even  by  en- 
couraging the  "Captains  of  Industry"  to  a  less  wasteful  organ- 
isation of  their  several  enterprises  on  a  profit-making  basis. 
What  the  Labour  Party  looks  to  is  a  genuinely  scientific  re- 
organisation of  the  nation's  industry,  no  longer  deflected  by  in- 


APPENDIX  IV  383 

dividual  profiteering,  on  the  basis  of  the  Common  Ownership 
of  the  Means  of  Production ;  the  equitable  sharing  of  the  pro- 
ceeds among  all  who  participate  in  any  capacity  and  only 
among  these,  and  the  adoption,  in  particular  services  and  oc- 
cupations, of  those  systems  and  methods  of  administration  and 
control  that  may  be  found,  in  practice,  best  to  promote,  not 
profiteering,  but  the  public  interest. 


IMMEDIATE  NATIONALISATION 

The  Labour  Party  stands  not  merely  for  the  principle  of  the 
Common  Ownership  of  the  nation's  land,  to  be  applied  as  suit- 
able opportunities  occur,  but  also,  specifically,  for  the  imme- 
diate Nationalisation  of  Railways,  Mines  and  the  production  of 
Electrical  Power.  We  hold  that  the  very  foundation  of  any 
successful  reorganisation  of  British  Industry  must  necessarily 
be  found  in  the  provision  of  the  utmost  facilities  for  trans- 
port and  communication,  the  production  of  power  at  the 
cheapest  possible  rate  and  the  most  economical  supply  of  both 
electrical  energy  and  coal  to  every  corner  of  the  kingdom. 
Hence  the  Labour  Party  stands,  unhesitatingly,  for  the  Na- 
tional Ownership  and  Administration  of  the  Railways  and 
Canals,  and  their  union,  along  with  Harbours  and  Roads,  and 
the  Posts  and  Telegraphs — not  to  say  also  the  great  lines  of 
steamers  which  could  at  once  be  owned,  if  not  immediately 
directly  managed  in  detail,  by  the  Government — in  a  united 
national  service  of  Communication  and  Transport;  to  be 
worked,  unhampered  by  capitalist,  private  or  purely  local  in- 
terests (and  with  a  steadily  increasing  participation  of  the 
organised  workers  in  the  management,  both  central  and  local), 
exclusively  for  the  common  good.  If  any  Government  should 
be  so  misguided  as  to  propose,  when  peace  comes,  to  hand  the 
railways  back  to  the  shareholders ;  or  should  show  itself  so 
spendthrift  of  the  nation's  property  as  to  give  these  share- 
holders any  enlarged  franchise  by  presenting  them  with  the 
economies  of  unification  or  the  profits  of  increased  railway 
rates;  or  so  extravagant  as  to  bestow  public  funds  on  the  re- 
equipment  of  privately-owned  lines — all  of  which  things  are 
now  being  privately  intrigued  for  by  the  railway  interests — 
the  Labour  Party  will  offer  any  such  project  the  most  strenuous 
opposition.  The  railways  and  canals,  like  the  roads,  must 
henceforth  belong  to  the  public,  and  to  the  public  alone. 


384  APPENDIX  IV 

In  the  production  of  Electricity,  for  cheap  Power,  Light,  and 
Heating,  this  country  has  so  far  failed,  because  of  hampering 
private  interests,  to  take  advantage  of  science.  Even  in  the 
largest  cities  we  still  "peddle"  our  Electricity  on  a  contemptibly 
small  scale.  What  is  called  for,  immediately  after  the  v^^ar,  is 
the  erection  of  a  score  of  gigantic  "super-powder  stations," 
which  could  generate,  at  incredibly  cheap  rates,  enough  Elec- 
tricity for  the  use  of  every  industrial  establishment  and  every 
private  household  in  Great  Britain ;  the  present  municipal  and 
joint-stock  electrical  plants  being  universally  linked  up  and 
used  for  local  distribution.  This  is  inevitably  the  future  of 
Electricity.  It  is  plain  that  so  great  and  so  powerful  an  enter- 
prise, affecting  every  industrial  enterprise  and,  eventually,  every 
household,  must  not  be  allowed  to  pass  into  the  hands  of  private 
capitalists.  They  are  already  pressing  the  Government  for 
the  concession,  and  neither  the  Liberal  nor  the  Conservative 
Party  has  yet  made  up  its  mind  to  a  refusal  of  such  a  new  en- 
dowment of  profiteering  in  what  will  presently  be  the  life- 
blood  of  modern  productive  industry.  The  Labour  Party  de- 
mands that  the  production  of  Electricity  on  the  necessary 
gigantic  scale  shall  be  made,  from  the  start  (with  suitable  ar- 
rangements for  municipal  co-operation  in  local  distribution)  a 
national  enterprise,  to  be  worked  exclusively  with  the  object 
of  supplying  the  whole  kingdom  with  the  cheapest  possible 
Power,  Light,  and  Heat, 

But  with  Railways  and  the  generation  of  Electricity  in  the 
hands  of  the  public,  it  would  be  criminal  folly  to  leave  to  the 
present  1,500  colliery  companies  the  power  of  "holding  up"  the 
coal  supply.  These  are  now  all  working  under  public  control, 
on  terms  that  virtually  afford  to  their  shareholders  a  statutory 
guarantee  of  their  swollen  incomes.  The  Labour  Party  de- 
mands the  immediate  Nationalisation  of  Mines,  the  extraction 
of  coal  and  iron  being  worked  as  a  public  service  (with  a 
steadily  increasing  participation  in  the  management,  both  cen- 
tral arrd  local,  of  the  various  grades  of  persons  employed)  ;  and 
the  whole  business  of  the  retail  distribution  of  household  coal 
being  undertaken,  as  a  local  public  service,  by  the  elected  Mu- 
nicipal or  County  Councils.  And  there  is  no  reason  why  coal 
should  fluctuate  in  price  any  more  than  railway  fares,  or  why 
the  consumer  should  be  made  to  pay  more  in  winter  than  in 
summer,  or  in  one  town  than  another.  What  the  Labour  Party 
would  aim  at  is,  for  household  coal  of  standard  quality,  a  fixed 


APPENDIX  IV  38s 

and  uniform  price  for  the  whole  kingdom,  payable  by  rich 
and  poor  alike,  as  unalterable  as  the  penny  postage-stamp. 

But  the  sphere  of  immediate  Nationalisation  is  not  restricted 
to  these  great  industries.  We  shall  never  succeed  in  putting 
the  gigantic  system  of  Health  Insurance  on  a  proper  footing,  or 
secure  a  clear  field  for  the  beneficent  work  of  the  Friendly 
Societies,  or  gain  a  free  hand  for  the  necessary  development  of 
the  urgently  called  for  Ministry  of  Health  and  the  Local  Pub- 
lic Health  Service,  until  the  nation  expropriates  the  profit-mak- 
ing Industrial  Insurance  Companies,  which  now  so  tyrannously 
exploit  the  people  with  their  wasteful  house-to-house  Industrial 
Life  Assurance.  Only  by  such  an  expropriation  of  Life  Assur- 
ance Companies  can  we  secure  the  universal  provision,  free 
from  the  burdensome  toll  of  weekly  pence,  of  the  indispensable 
Funeral  Benefit.  Nor  is  it  in  any  sense  a  "class"  measure. 
Only  by  the  assumption  by  a  State  Department  of  the  whole 
business  of  Life  Assurance  can  the  millions  of  policy-holders 
of  all  classes  be  completely  protected  against  the  possibly  calam- 
itous results  of  the  depreciation  of  securities  and  suspension  of 
bonuses  which  the  war  is  causing.  Only  by  this  means  can  the 
great  staff  of  insurance  agents  find  their  proper  place  as  Civil 
Servants,  with  equitable  conditions  of  employment,  compensa- 
tion for  any  disturbance  and  security  of  tenure,  in  a  nationally 
organised  public  service  for  the  discharge  of  the  steadily  in- 
creasing functions  of  the  Government  in  Vital  Statistics  and 
Social  Insurance. 

In  quite  another  sphere  the  Labour  Party  sees  the  key  to 
Temperance  Reform  in  taking  the  entire  manufacture  and  re- 
tailing of  alcoholic  drink  out  of  the  hands  of  those  who  find 
profit  in  promoting  the  utmost  possible  consumption.  This 
is  essentially  a  case  in  which  the  people,  as  a  whole,  must 
assert  its  right  to  full  and  unfettered  power  for  dealing  with 
the  licensing  question  in  accordance  with  local  opinion.  For 
this  purpose,  localities  should  have  conferred  upon  them 
facilities 

(a)     To  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  within  their  boundaries; 
(6)     To  reduce  the  number  of  licences   and  regulate  the 

conditions  under  which  they  may  be  held;  and 
(c)     If  a  locality  decides  that  licences  are  to  be  granted,  to 

determine  whether  such  licences  shall  be  under  private 

or  any  form  of  public  control. 


386  APPENDIX  I}L 

Municipalisation 

Other  main  industries,  especially  those  now  becoming  monop- 
olised, should  be  nationalised  as  opportunity  offers.  Moreover, 
the  Labour  Party  holds  that  the  Municipalities  should  not  con- 
fine their  activities  to  the  necessarily  costly  services  of  Educa- 
tion, Sanitation,  and  Police ;  nor  yet  rest  content  with  acquir- 
ing control  of  the  local  Water,  Gas,  Electricity,  and  Tram- 
ways; but  that  every  facility  should  be  afforded  to  them  to  ac- 
quire (easily,  quickly,  and  cheaply)  all  the  land  they  require, 
and  to  extend  their  enterprises  in  Housing  and  Town  Planning, 
Parks,  and  Public  Libraries,  the  provision  of  music  and  the 
organisation  of  recreation;  and  also  to  undertake,  besides  the 
retailing  of  coal,  other  services  of  common  utility,  particularly 
the  local  supply  of  milk,  wherever  this  is  not  already  fully  and 
satisfactorily  organised  by  a  Co-operative  Society. 

Control  of  Capitalist  Industry 

Meanwhile,  however,  we  ought  not  to  throw  away  the  valu- 
able experience  now  gained  by  the  Government  in  its  assump- 
tion of  the  importation  of  wheat,  wool,  metals,  and  other  com- 
modities, and  in  its  control  of  the  shipping,  woollen,  leather, 
clothing,  boot  and  shoe,  milling,  baking,  butchering,  and  other 
industries.  The  Labour  Party  holds  that,  whatever  may  have 
been  the  shortcomings  of  this  Government  importation  and 
control,  it  has  demonstrably  prevented  a  lot  of  "profiteering." 
Nor  can  it  end  immediately  on  the  Declaration  of  Peace.  The 
people  will  be  extremely  foolish  if  they  ever  allow  their  in- 
dispensable industries  to  slip  back  into  the  unfettered  control  of 
private  capitalists,  who  are,  actually  at  the  instance  of  the 
Government  itself,  now  rapidly  combining,  trade  by  trade,  into 
monopolist  Trusts,  which  may  presently  become  as  ruthless  in 
their  extortion  as  the  worst  American  examples.  Standing  as 
it  does  for  the  Democratic  Control  of  Industry,  the  Labour 
Party  would  think  twice  before  it  sanctioned  any  abandonment 
of  the  present  profitable  centralisation  of  purchase  of  raw 
material;  of  the  present  carefully  organised  "rationing,"  by 
joint  committees  of  the  trades  concerned,  of  the  several  estab- 
lishments with  the  materials  they  require;  of  the  present 
elaborate  system  of  "costing"  and  public  audit  of  manufacturers' 
accounts,  so  as  to  stop  the  waste  heretofore  caused  by  the 
mechanical  inefficiency  of  the  more  backward   firms ;   of  the 


APPENDIX  IV  387 

present  salutary  publicity  of  manufacturing  processes  and  ex- 
penses thereby  ensured;  and,  on  the  information  thus  obtained 
(in  order  never  again  to  revert  to  the  old-time  profiteering) 
of  the  present  rigid  fixing,  for  standardised  products,  of  maxi- 
mum prices  at  the  factory,  at  the  warehouse  of  the  whole- 
sale trader,  and  in  the  retail  shop.  This  question  of  the  retail 
prices  of  household  commodities  is  emphatically  the  most 
practical  of  all  political  issues  to  the  woman  elector.  The  male 
politicians  have  too  long  neglected  the  grievances  of  the  small 
household,  which  is  the  prey  of  every  profiteering  combina- 
tion ;  and  neither  the  Liberal  nor  the  Conservative  Party  prom- 
ises, in  this  respect,  any  amendment.  This,  too,  is  in  no  sense 
a  "class"  measure.  It  is,  so  the  Labour  Party  holds,  just  as 
much  the  function  of  Government,  and  just  as  necessary  a  part 
of  the  Democratic  Regulation  of  Industry,  to  safeguard  the 
interests  of  the  community  as  a  whole,  and  those  of  all  grades 
and  sections  of  private  consumers,  in  the  matter  of  prices,  as  it 
is,  by  the  Factory  and  Trade  Boards  Acts,  to  protect  the  rights 
of  the  wage-earning  producers  in  the  matter  of  wages,  hours  of 
labour,  and  sanitation. 

A   REVOLUTION    IN    NATIONAL   FINANCE 

In  taxation,  also,  the  interests  of  the  professional  and  house- 
keeping classes  are  at  one  with  those  of  the  manual  workers. 
Too  long  has  our  National  Finance  been  regulated,  contrary 
to  the  teaching  of  Political  Economy,  according  to  the  wishes 
of  the  possessing  classes  and  the  profits  of  the  financiers.  The 
colossal  expenditure  involved  in  the  present  war  (of  which, 
against  the  protest  of  the  Labour  Party,  only  a  quarter  has 
been  raised  by  taxation,  whilst  three-quarters  have  been  bor- 
rowed at  onerous  rates  of  interest,  to  be  a  burden  on  the  na- 
tion's future)  brings  things  to  a  crisis.  When  peace  comes, 
capital  will  be  needed  for  all  sorts  of  social  enterprises,  and 
the  resources  of  Government  will  necessarily  have  to  be  vastly 
greater  than  they  were  before  the  war.  Meanwhile  innumer- 
able new  private  fortunes  are  being  heaped  up  by  those  who 
have  taken  advantage  of  the  nation's  needs;  and  the  one-tenth 
of  the  population  which  owns  nine-tenths  of  the  riches  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  far  from  being  made  poorer,  will  find  itself, 
in  the  aggregate,  as  a  result  of  the  war,  drawing  in  rent  and 
interest  and  dividends  a  larger  nominal  income  than  ever  be- 


388  APPENDIX  IV 

fore.  Such  a  position  demands  a  revolution  in  national  finance. 
How  are  we  to  discharge  a  public  debt  that  may  well  reach 
the  almost  incredible  figure  of  7,000  million  pounds  sterling, 
and  at  the  same  time  raise  an  annual  revenue  which,  for  local 
as  well  as  central  government,  must  probably  reach  1,000  mil- 
lions a  year?  It  is  over  this  problem  of  taxation  that  the 
various  political  parties  will  be  found  to  be  most  sharply  di- 
vided. 

The  Labour  Party  stands  for  such  a  system  of  taxation  as 
will  yield  all  the  necessary  revenue  to  the  Government  without 
encroaching  on  the  prescribed  National  Minimum  Standard  of 
Life  of  any  family  whatsoever;  without  hampering  produc- 
tion or  discouraging  any  useful  personal  effort,  and  with  the 
nearest  possible  approximation  to  equality  of  sacrifice.  We 
definitely  repudiate  all  proposals  for  a  Protective  Tariff,  in 
whatever  specious  guise  they  may  be  cloaked,  as  a  device  for 
burdening  the  consumer  with  unnecessarily  enhanced  prices,  to 
the  profit  of  the  capitalist  employer  or  landed  proprietor,  who 
avowedly  expects  his  profit  or  rent  to  be  increased  thereby.  We 
shall  strenuously  oppose  any  taxation,  of  whatever  kind,  which 
would  increase  the  price  of  food  or  of  any  other  necessary  of 
life.  We  hold  that  indirect  taxation  on  commodities,  whether 
by  Customs  or  Excise,  should  be  strictly  limited  to  luxuries; 
and  concentrated  principally  on  those  of  which  it  is  socially 
desirable  that  the  consumption  should  be  actually  discouraged. 
We  are  at  one  with  the  manufacturer,  the  farmer,  and  the 
trader  in  objecting  to  taxes  interfering  with  production  or 
commerce,  or  hampering  transport  and  communications.  In 
all  these  matters — once  more  in  contrast  with  the  other  political 
parties,  and  by  no  means  in  the  interests  of  the  wage-earners 
alone — the  Labour  Party  demands  that  the  very  definite  teach- 
ings of  economic  science  should  no  longer  be  disregarded. 

For  the  raising  of  the  greater  part  of  the  revenue  now  re- 
quired the  Labour  Party  looks  to  the  direct  taxation  of  the  in- 
comes above  the  necessary  cost  of  family  maintenance;  and  for 
the  requisite  effort  to  pay  off  the  National  Debt,  to  the  direct 
taxation  of  private  fortunes  both  during  life  and  at  death.  The 
Income  Tax  and  Super-tax  ought  at  once  to  be  thoroughly  re- 
formed in  assessment  and  collection,  in  abatements  and  allow- 
ances and  in  graduation  and  differentiation,  so  as  to  levy  the 
required  total  sum  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  the  real  sacrifice  of 
all  the  taxpayers  as  nearly  as  possible  equal.     This  would  in- 


APPENDIX  IV  380 

volve  assessment  by  families  instead  of  by  individual  persons, 
so  that  the  burden  is  alleviated  in  proportion  to  the  number  of 
persons  to  be  maintained.  It  would  involve  the  raising  of  the 
present  unduly  low  minimum  income  assessable  to  the  tax,  and 
the  lightening  of  the  present  unfair  burden  on  the  great  mass 
of  professional  and  small  trading  classes  by  a  new  scale  of 
graduation,  rising  from  a  penny  in  the  pound  on  the  smallest 
assessable  income  up  to  sixteen  or  even  nineteen  shillings  in 
the  pound  on  the  highest  income  of  the  millionaires.  It  would 
involve  bringing  into  assessment  the  numerous  windfalls  of 
profit  that  now  escape,  and  a  further  differentiation  between  es- 
sentially different  kinds  of  income.  The  Excess  Profits  Tax 
might  well  be  retained  in  an  appropriate  form;  whilst  so  long 
as  Mining  Royalties  exist  the  Mineral  Rights  Duty  ought  to  be 
increased.  The  steadily  rising  Unearned  Increment  of  urban 
and  mineral  land  ought,  by  an  appropriate  direct  Taxation  of 
Land  Values,  to  be  wholly  brought  into  the  Public  Exchequer. 
At  the  same  time,  for  the  service  and  redemption  of  the  Na- 
tional Debt,  the  Death  Duties  ought  to  be  regraduated,  much 
more  strictly  collected,  and  greatly  increased.  In  this  matter 
we  need,  in  fact,  completely  to  reverse  our  point  of  view,  and 
to  rearrange  the  whole  taxation  of  Inheritance  from  the  stand- 
point of  asking  what  is  the  maximum  amount  that  any  rich 
man  should  be  permitted  at  death  to  divert,  by  his  will,  from 
the  National  Exchequer,  which  should  normally  be  the  heir  to 
all  private  riches  in  excess  of  a  quite  moderate  amount  by 
way  of  family  provision.  But  all  this  will  not  suffice.  It  will 
be  imperative  at  the  earliest  possible  moment  to  free  the  na- 
tion from  at  any  rate  the  greater  part  of  its  new  load  of  in- 
terest-bearing debt  for  loans  which  ought  to  have  been  levied 
as  taxation;  and  the  Labour  Party  stands  for  a  special  Capital 
Levy  to  pay  off,  if  not  the  whole,  a  very  substantial  part  of 
the  entire  National  Debt — a  Capital  Levy  chargeable  like  the 
Death  Duties  on  all  property,  but  (in  order  to  secure  approxi- 
mate equality  of  sacrifice)  with  exemption  of  the  smallest  sav- 
ings, and  for  the  rest  at  rates  very  steeply  graduated,  so  as 
to  take  only  a  small  contribution  from  the  little  people  and  a 
very  much  larger  percentage  from  the  millionaires. 

Over  this  issue  of  how  the  financial  burden  of  the  war  is  to 
be  borne,  and  how  the  necessary  revenue  is  to  be  raised,  the 
greatest  political  battles  will  be  fought.  In  this  matter  the 
Labour  Party  claims  the  support  of  four-fifths  of  the  whole 


390  APPENDIX  IV 

nation,  for  the  interests  of  the  clerk,  the  teacher,  the  doctor, 
the  minister  of  religion,  the  average  retail  shopkeeper  and 
trader,  and  all  the  mass  of  those  living  on  small  incomes  arc 
identical  with  those  of  the  artisan.  The  landlords,  the  financial 
magnates,  the  possessors  of  great  fortunes  will  not,  as  a  class, 
willingly  forego  the  relative  immunity  that  they  have  hitherto 
enjoyed.  The  present  unfair  subjection  of  the  Co-operative 
Society  to  an  Excess  Profits  Tax  on  the  "profits"  which  it  has 
never  made — specially  dangerous  as  "the  thin  end  of  the 
wedge"  of  penal  taxation  of  this  laudable  form  of  Democratic 
enterprise — will  not  be  abandoned  without  a  struggle.  Every 
possible  efifort  will  be  made  to  juggle  with  the  taxes,  so  as  to 
place  upon  the  shoulders  of  the  mass  of  labouring  folk  and 
upon  the  struggling  households  of  the  professional  men  and 
small  traders  (as  was  done  after  every  previous  war) — whether 
by  Customs  or  Excise  Duties,  by  industrial  monopolies,  by  un- 
necessarily high  rates  of  postage  and  railway  fares,  or  by  a 
thousand  and  one  other  ingenious  devices — an  unfair  share  of 
the  national  burden.  Against  these  efforts  the  Labour  Party 
will  take  the  firmest  stand. 

THE    SURPLUS    FOR    THE   COMMON    GOOD 

In  the  disposal  of  the  surplus  above  the  Standard  of  Life 
society  has  hitherto  gone  as  far  wrong  as  in  its  neglect  to  secure 
the  necessary  basis  of  any  genuine  industrial  efficiency  or  decent 
social  order.  We  have  allowed  the  riches  of  our  mines,  the 
rental  value  of  the  lands  superior  to  the  margin  of  cultiva- 
tion, the  extra  profits  of  the  fortunate  capitalists,  even  the  ma- 
terial outcome  of  scientific  discoveries — which  ought  by  now  to 
have  made  this  Britain  of  ours  immune  from  class  poverty  or 
from  any  widespread  destitution — to  be  absorbed  by  individual 
proprietors;  and  then  devoted  very  largely  to  the  senseless 
luxury  of  an  idle  rich  class.  Against  this  misappropriation 
of  the  wealth  of  the  community,  the  Labour  Party — speaking 
in  the  interests  not  of  the  v.'age-earners  alone,  but  of  every 
grade  and  section  of  producers  by  hand  or  by  brain,  not  to  men- 
tion also  those  of  the  generations  that  are  to  succeed  us,  and 
of  the  permanent  welfare  of  the  community — emphatically  pro- 
tests. One  main  Pillar  of  the  House  that  the  Labour  Party  in- 
tends to  build  is  the  future  appropriation  of  the  Surplus,  not 
to  the  enlargement  of  any  individual  fortune,  but  to  the  Com- 
mon Good.     It  is  from  this  constantly  arising  Surplus   (to  be 


APPENDIX  IV  391 

secured,  on  the  one  hand,  by  Nationalisation  and  Municipali- 
sation  and,  on  the  other,  by  the  steeply  graduated  Taxation  of 
Private  Income  and  Riches)  that  will  have  to  be  found  the 
new  capital  which  the  community  day  by  day  needs  for  the 
perpetual  improvement  and  increase  of  its  various  enterprises, 
for  which  we  shall  decline  to  be  dependent  on  the  usury-ex- 
acting financiers.  It  is  from  the  same  source  that  has  to  be 
defrayed  the  public  provision  for  the  Sick  and  Infirm  of  all 
kinds  (including  that  for  Maternity  and  Infancy)  which  is 
still  so  scandalously  insufficient;  for  the  Aged  and  those  pre- 
maturely incapacitated  by  accident  or  disease,  now  in  many 
ways  so  imperfectly  cared  for;  for  the  Education  alike  of 
children,  of  adolescents  and  of  adults,  in  which  the  Labour 
Party  demands  a  genuine  equality  of  opportunity,  overcoming 
all  differences  of  material  circumstances ;  and  for  the  organisa- 
tion of  public  improvements  of  all  kinds,  including  the  brighten- 
ing of  the  lives  of  those  now  condemned  to  almost  ceaseless 
toil,  and  a  great  development  of  the  means  of  recreation. 
From  the  same  source  must  come  the  greatly  increased  public 
provision  that  the  Labour  Party  will  insist  on  being  made  for 
scientific  investigation  and  original  research,  in  every  branch 
of  knowledge,  not  to  say  also  for  the  promotion  of  music, 
literature  and  fine  art,  which  have  been  under  Capitalism  so 
greatly  neglected,  and  upon  which,  so  the  Labour  Party  holds, 
any  real  development  of  civilisation  fundamentally  depends. 
Society,  like  the  individual,  does  not  live  by  bread  alone — does 
not  exist  only  for  perpetual  wealth  production.  It  is  in  the  pro- 
posal for  this  appropriation  of  every  Surplus  for  the  Com- 
mon Good — in  the  vision  of  its  resolute  use  for  the  building 
up  of  the  community  as  a  whole  instead  of  for  the  magnifica- 
tion of  individual  fortunes — that  the  Labour  Party,  as  the 
Party  of  the  Producers  by  hand  or  by  brain,  most  distinctively 
marks  itself  off  from  the  older  political  parties,  standing,  as 
these  do,  essentially  for  the  maintenance,  unimpaired,  of  the 
perpetual  private  mortgage  upon  the  annual  product  of  the 
nation  that  is  involved  in  the  individual  ownership  of  land 
and  capital. 

THE    STREET    OF    TO-MORROW 

The  House  which  the  Labour  Party  intends  to  build,  the  four 
Pillars  of  which  have  now  been  described,  does  not  stand  alone 


392  APPENDIX  IV 

in  the  world.  Where  will  it  be  in  the  Street  of  To-morrow?  If 
we  repudiate,  on  the  one  hand,  the  Imperialism  that  seeks  to 
dominate  other  races,  or  to  impose  our  own  will  on  other  parts 
of  the  British  Empire,  so  we  disclaim  equally  any  conception 
of  a  selfish  and  insular  "non-interventionism,"  unregarding  of 
our  special  obligations  to  our  fellow-citizens  overseas;  of  the 
corporate  duties  of  one  nation  to  another;  of  the  moral  claims 
upon  us  of  the  non-adult  races,  and  of  our  own  indebtedness  to 
the  world  of  which  we  are  part.  We  look  for  an  ever-in- 
creasing intercourse,  a  constantly  developing  exchange  of  com- 
modities, a  steadily  growing  mutual  understanding,  and  a  con- 
tinually expanding  friendly  co-operation  among  all  the  peoples 
of  the  world.  With  regard  to  that  great  Commonwealth  of  all 
races,  all  colours,  all  religions  and  all  degrees  of  civilisation, 
that  we  call  the  British  Empire,  the  Labour  Party  stands  for 
its  maintenance  and  its  progressive  development  on  the  lines 
of  Local  Autonomy  and  "Home  Rule  All  Round";  the  fullest 
respect  for  the  rights  of  each  people,  whatever  its  colour,  to  all 
the  Democratic  Self-Government  of  which  it  is  capable,  and  to 
the  proceeds  of  its  own  toil  upon  the  resources  of  its  own  ter- 
ritorial home;  and  the  closest  possible  co-operation  among  all 
the  various  members  of  what  has  become  essentially  not  an 
Empire  in  the  old  sense,  but  a  Britannic  Alliance.  We  desire  to 
maintain  the  most  intimate  relations  with  the  Labour  Parties 
overseas.  Like  them,  we  have  no  sympathy  with  the  projects 
of  "Imperial  Federation,"  in  so  far  as  these  imply  the  sub- 
jection to  a  common  Imperial  Legislature  wielding  coercive 
power  (including  dangerous  facilities  for  coercive  Imperial 
taxation  and  for  enforced  military  service),  either  of  the  ex- 
isting Self-Governing  Dominions,  whose  autonomy  would  be 
thereby  invaded;  or  of  the  United  Kingdom,  whose  freedom 
of  Democratic  self-development  would  be  thereby  hampered; 
or  of  India  and  the  Colonial  Dependencies,  which  would  there- 
by run  the  risk  of  being  further  exploited  for  the  benefit  of  a 
"White  Empire."  We  do  not  intend,  by  any  such  "Imperial 
Senate,"  either  to  bring  the  plutocracy  of  Canada  and  South 
Africa  to  the  aid  of  the  British  aristocracy,  or  to  enable  the 
landlords  and  financiers  of  the  Mother  Country  to  unite  in 
controlling  the  growing  Popular  Democracies  overseas.  The 
absolute  autonomy  of  each  self-governing  part  of  the  Empire 
must   be    maintained   intact.     What   we   look    for,    besides    a 


APPENDIX  IV  393 

constant  progress  in  Democratic  Self-Government  of  every  part 
of  the  Britannic  Alliance,  and  especially  in  India,  is  a  con- 
tinuous participation  of  the  Ministers  of  the  Dominions,  of 
India,  and  eventually  of  other  Dependencies  (perhaps  by  means 
of  their  own  Ministers  specially  resident  in  London  for  this 
purpose)  in  the  most  confidential  deliberations  of  the  Cabinet, 
so  far  as  Foreign  Policy  and  Imperial  Affairs  are  concerned ; 
and  the  annual  assembly  of  an  Imperial  Council,  represent- 
ing all  constituents  of  the  Britannic  Alliance  and  all  parties 
in  their  Local  Legislatures,  which  should  discuss  all  matters 
of  common  interest,  but  only  in  order  to  make  recommenda- 
tions for  the  simultaneous  consideration  of  the  various 
autunoaious  local  legislatures  of  what  should  increasingly  take 
the  constitutional  form  of  an  Alliance  of  Free  Nations.  And 
we  carry  the  idea  further.  As  regards  our  relations  to  Foreign 
Countries,  we  disavow  and  disclaim  any  desire  or  intention  to 
dispossess  or  to  impoverish  any  other  State  or  Nation.  We 
seek  no  increase  of  territory.  We  disclaim  all  idea  of  "eco- 
nomic war."  We  ourselves  object  to  all  Protective  Cus- 
toms Tariffs ;  but  we  hold  that  each  nation  must  be  left  free  to 
do  what  it  thinks  best  for  its  own  economic  development,  with- 
out thought  of  injuring  others.  We  believe  that  nations  are 
in  no  way  damaged  by  each  other's  economic  prosperity  or 
commercial  progress;  but,  on  the  contrary,  that  they  are 
actually  themselves  mutually  enriched  thereby.  We  would 
therefore  put  an  end  to  the  old  entanglements  and  mystifica- 
tions of  Secret  Diplomacy  and  the  formation  of  Leagues  against 
Leagues.  We  stand  for  the  immediate  establishment,  actually 
as  a  part  of  the  Treaty  of  Peace  with  which  the  present  war 
will  end,  of  a  Universal  League  or  Society  of  Nations,  a  Super- 
national  Authority,  with  an  International  High  Court  to  try 
all  justiciable  issues  between  nations;  an  International  Legis- 
lature to  enact  such  common  laws  as  can  be  mutually  agreed 
upon,  and  an  International  Council  of  Mediation  to  endeavour 
to  settle  without  ultimate  conflict  even  those  disputes  which 
are  not  justiciable.  We  would  have  all  the  nations  of  the 
world  most  solemnly  undertake  and  promise  to  make  common 
cause  against  any  one  of  them  that  broke  away  from  this 
fundamental  agreement.  The  world  has  suffered  too  much  from 
war  for  the  Labour  Party  to  have  any  other  policy  than  that 
of  lasting  Peace. 


394  APPENDIX  IV 

The  Labour  Party  is  far  from  assuming  that  it  possesses  a 
key  to  open  all  locks;  or  that  any  policy  which  it  can  formulate 
will  solve  all  the  problems  that  beset  us.  But  we  deem  it  im- 
portant to  ourselves  as  well  as  to  those  who  may,  on  the  one 
hand,  wish  to  join  the  Party,  or,  on  the  other,  to  take  up  arms 
against  it,  to  make  quite  clear  and  definite  our  aim  and  pur- 
pose. The  Labour  Party  wants  that  aim  and  purpose,  as  set 
forth  in  the  preceding  pages,  with  all  its  might.  It  calls  for 
more  warmth  in  politics,  for  much  less  apathetic  acquiescence  in 
the  miseries  that  exist,  for  none  of  the  cynicism  that  saps  the 
life  of  leisure.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Labour  Party  has  no 
belief  in  any  of  the  problems  of  the  world  being  solved  by  Good 
Will  alone.  Good  Will  without  knowledge  is  Warmth  without 
Light.  Especially  in  all  the  complexities  of  politics,  in  the 
still  undeveloped  Science  of  Society,  the  Labour  Party  stands 
for  increased  study,  for  the  scientific  investigation  of  each 
succeeding  problem,  for  the  deliberate  organisation  of  re- 
search, and  for  a  much  more  rapid  dissemination  among  the 
whole  people  of  all  the  science  that  exists.  And  it  is  perhaps 
specially  the  Labour  Party  that  has  the  duty  of  placing  this 
Advancement  of  Science  in  the  forefront  of  its  political  pro- 
gramme. What  the  Labour  Party  stands  for  in  all  fields  of  life 
is,  essentially.  Democratic  Co-operation;  and  Co-operation  in- 
volves a  common  purpose  which  can  be  agreed  to;  a  common 
plan  which  can  be  explained  and  discussed,  and  such  a  measure 
of  success  in  the  adaptation  of  means  to  ends  as  will  ensure  a 
common  satisfaction.  An  autocratic  Sultan  may  govern  with- 
out science  if  his  whim  is  law.  A  Plutocratic  Party  may  choose 
to  ignore  science,  if  it  is  heedless  whether  its  pretended  solu- 
tions of  social  problems  that  may  win  political  triumphs  ulti- 
mately succeed  or  fail.  But  no  Labour  Party  can  hope  to  main- 
tain its  position  unless  its  proposals  are,  in  fact,  the  outcome  of 
the  best  Political  Science  of  its  time;  or  to  fulfil  its  purpose 
unless  that  science  is  continually  wresting  new  fields  from  hu- 
man ignorance.  Hence,  although  the  Purpose  of  the  Labour 
Party  must,  by  the  law  of  its  being,  remain  for  all  time  un- 
changed, its  Policy  and  its  Programme  will,  we  hope,  undergo 
a  perpetual  development,  as  knowledge  grows,  and  as  new 
phases  of  the  social  problem  present  themselves,  in  a  con- 
tinually finer  adjustment  of  our  measures  to  our  ends.  If  Law 
is  the  Mother  of  Freedom,  Science,  to  the  Labour  Party,  must 
be  the  Parent  of  Law. 


APPENDIX  V 
RESOLUTIONS  ON  RECONSTRUCTION 

ADOPTED  BY  THE  CONFERENCE  OF  THE  BRITISH   LABOUR  PARTY, 
LONDON,    JUNE    26,     I918 

I.      THE  TASK  OF  SOCIAL  RECONSTRUCTION 

That,  in  the  opinion  of  the  conference,  the  task  of  social  re- 
construction to  be  organised  and  undertaken  by  the  govern- 
ment, in  conjunction  with  the  local  authorities,  ought  to  be 
regarded  as  involving,  not  any  patchwork  jerrymandering  of 
the  anarchic  individualism  and  profiteering  of  the  competitive 
capitalism  of  pre-war  time — the  breakdown  of  which,  even 
from  the  standpoint  of  productive  eilficiency,  the  war  has  so 
glaringly  revealed — but  the  gradual  building  up  of  a  new  social 
order,  based  not  an  internecine  conflict,  inequality  of  riches, 
and  dominion  over  subject  classes,  subject  races,  or  a  subject 
sex,  but  on  the  deliberately  planned  co-operation  in  production, 
distribution  and  exchange,  the  systematic  approach  to  a  healthy 
equality,  the  widest  possible  participation  in  power,  both  eco- 
nomic and  political,  and  the  general  consciousness  of  consent 
which  characterise  a  true  democracy;  and,  further,  in  order  to 
help  to  realise  the  new  social  order  and  to  give  legislative  effect 
to  the  labour  policy  on  reconstruction,  this  conference  em- 
phasizes the  necessity  of  having  in  Parliament  and  the  country 
a  vigorous,  courageous,  independent,  and  unfettered  political 
party. 

2.      THE    NEED    FOR    INCREASED    PRODUCTION 

That  the  conference  cannot  help  noticing  how  very  far  from 
efficient  the  capitalist  system  has  been  proved  to  be,  with  its 
stimulus  of  private  profit,  and  its  evil  shadow  of  wages  driven 
down  by  competition  often  below  subsistence  level;  that  the 
conference  recognises  that  it  is  vital  for  any  genuine  social  re- 
construction to  increase  the  nation's  aggregate  annual  produc- 

395 


396  APPENDIX  V 

tion,  not  of  profit  or  dividend,  but  of  useful  commodities  and 
services;  that  this  increased  productivity  is  obviously  not  to  be 
sought  in  reducing  the  means  of  subsistence  of  the  workers, 
v^^hether  by  hand  or  by  brain,  nor  yet  in  lengthening  their  hours 
of  work,  for  neither  "sweating"  nor  "driving"  can  be  made  the 
basis  of  lasting  prosperity,  but  in  the  socialisation  of  industry 
in  order  to  secure 

(a)  the  elimination  of  every  kind  of  inefficiency  and  waste; 

(b)  the  application  both  of  more  honest  determination  to 
produce  the  very  best,  and  of  more  science  and  intelligence  to 
every  branch  of  the  nation's  work;  together  with 

(c)  an  improvement  in  social,  political,  and  industrial  or- 
ganisation; and 

(d)  the  indispensable  marshalling  of  the  nation's  resources  so 
that  each  need  is  met  in  the  order  of,  and  in  proportion  to,  its 
real  national  importance. 

3.      THE  MAINTENANCE  AND  PROTECTION  OF  THE 
STANDARD    OF    LIFE 

(i.)  That  the  conference  holds  that  it  is  of  supreme  na- 
tional importance  that  there  should  not  be  any  degradation 
of  the  standard  of  life  of  the  population;  and  it  insists  that 
it  is  accordingly  the  duty  of  the  government  to  see  to  it  that, 
when  peace  comes,  the  standard  rates  of  wages  in  all  trades 
should,  relatively  to  the  cost  of  living,  be  fully  maintained. 

(ii.)  That  it  should  be  made  clear  to  employers  that  any 
attempt  to  reduce  the  prevailing  rates  of  wages  when  peace 
comes,  or  to  take  advantage  of  the  dislocation  of  demobilisa- 
tion to  worsen  the  conditions  of  Labour,  will  certainly  lead  to 
embittered  industrial  strife,  which  will  be  in  the  highest  de- 
gree detrimental  to  the  national  interests;  and  the  government 
should  therefore  take  all  possible  steps  to  avert  such  a  calamity. 

(iii.)  That  the  government  should  not  only,  as  the  greatest 
employer  of  Labour,  set  a  good  example  in  this  respect,  but 
should  also  seek  to  influence  employers  by  proclaiming  in 
advance  that  it  will  not  attempt  to  lower  the  standard  rates 
or  conditions  in  public  employment,  by  announcing  that  it  will 
insist  on  the  most  rigorous  observance  of  the  fair  wages  clause 
in  public  contracts,  and  by  recommending  every  local  authority 
to  adopt  the  same  policy. 

(iv.)     That  one  of  the  most  urgent  needs  of  social  recon- 


APPENDIX  V  397 

struction  is  the  universal  application  of  the  principle  of  the 
protection  of  the  standard  of  life,  at  present  embodied  in  the 
factories,  workshops,  merchant  shipping,  mines,  railways,  shops, 
truck,  and  trade  boards  acts,  together  with  the  corresponding 
provisions  of  the  public  health,  housing,  education,  and  work- 
men's compensation  acts ;  that  these  imperfectly  drafted  and 
piecemeal  statutes  admittedly  require  extension  and  amend- 
ment at  many  points  and  supplementing  by  new  legislation  pro- 
viding among  other  industrial  reforms  for  the  general  reduc- 
tion of  the  working  week  to  forty-eight  hours,  securing  to  every 
worker,  by  hand  or  by  brain,  at  least  the  prescribed  minimum 
ot  health,  education,  leisure,  and  subsistence ;  and  that,  in  par- 
ticular, the  system  of  a  legal  basic  wage,  introduced  by  the  trade 
boards  act,  the  miners  (minimum  wage)  act,  and  the  wage 
board  clauses  of  the  corn  production  act,  needs  to  be  extended 
and  developed,  so  as  to  ensure  to  every  worker  of  either  sex,  in 
any  occupation,  in  any  part  of  the  kingdom,  as  the  very  lowest 
statutory  base  line  of  wages  (to  be  revised  with  every  sub- 
stantial rise  in  prices),  not  less  than  enough  to  provide  all  the 
requirements  of  a  full  development  of  body,  mind,  and  char- 
acter, from  which  the  nation  has  no  right  to  exclude  any  class 
or  section  whatsoever. 


4.      THE  PROVISION  FOR  THE  SOLDIERS  AND  SAILORS 

That  the  conference  realises  that,  as  soon  as  peace  is  assured 
the  position  of  the  soldier  or  sailor  will  be  one  of  great  peril; 
that,  whilst  his  services  to  the  nation  will  be  effusively  praised, 
and  promises  will  be  made  for  a  generous  provision  for  his 
needs,  there  is  only  too  much  reason  to  fear  that,  unless  a 
strong  and  continuous  effort  is  made,  both  in  Parliament  and 
in  the  localities,  administrative  parsimony  and  red-tape  will 
deprive  many  thousands  of  what  is  justly  due  to  them. 

The  conference  accordingly  holds  that  it  is  imperative  that 
the  provision  to  be  made  on  demobilisation  should  not  only  be 
worked  out  in  detail  immediately,  but  that  it  should  be  pub- 
lished for  general  information,  so  that  omissions  may  be  de- 
tected, mistakes  rectified,  and  every  one  made  acquainted  with 
the  steps  to  be  taken. 

The  conference,  noting  the  month's  furlough,  gratuity,  free 
railway  ticket,  and  a  year's  unemployment  benefit  if  out  of  work 
already  promised  to  the  soldier,  urges  that 


398  APPENDIX  V 

(a)  there  should  be  no  gap  between  the  cessation  of  his  pay 
and  separation  allowance  and  the  beginning  of  his  unemploy- 
ment benefit,  and 

(b)  that  this  special  ex-soldier's  unemployment  benefit  given 
to  all  should  be  additional  to  any  unemployment  benefit  under 
the  National  Insurance  act,  to  which  many  men  are  already  en- 
titled in  respect  of  contributions  deducted  from  their  wages; 

(c)  that  the  amount  of  the  unemployment  benefit  should  not 
be  the  present  starvation  pittance  of  7s.  per  week,  but  at  least 
approaching  to  the  combined  separation  and  rations  allowances ; 
and 

(d)  that,  in  view  of  the  change  in  the  value  of  money,  the 
gratuity  (which  should  be  made  payable  through  the  Post  Of- 
fice Savings  Bank)  ought  to  be,  for  the  private,  £20. 

The  conference  feels,  however,  that  what  the  soldiers  will 
most  seriously  look  to  is  not  the  sum  of  money  doled  out  to 
them,  but  the  provision  made  for  ensuring  them  situations  ap- 
propriate to  their  capacities  and  desires :  it  declares  that  this 
duty  of  placing  the  demobilised  soldier  within  reach  of  a 
suitable  situation  at  the  trade  union  standard  rate  is  one  for 
the  government  itself  to  discharge,  without  the  intervention 
of  charity  or  philanthropists. 

And  the  conference  demands  that  the  government  should  at 
once  complete  and  make  known  the  organization  projected  for 
fulfilling  this  duty,  including  appropriate  arrangements  for  en- 
abling such  of  the  men  as  wish  it  to  obtain  small  holdings,  for 
others  to  get  such  training  for  new  occupations  as  they  require, 
and  for  all  to  secure  such  posts  in  productive  work  or  service 
as  they  are  capable  of  filling,  or,  in  the  alternative,  to  be  main- 
tained until  such  posts  can  be  found. 

5.      THE  DISCHARGE  OF  CIVILIAN   W^AR  WORKERS 

That  this  conference,  realising  the  grave  industrial  condi- 
tions in  which  demobilisation  will  take  place,  demands  that  the 
same  careful  preparation  and  the  same  sort  of  provision  should 
be  made  in  advance  for  a  systematic  replacing  in  situations 
and  for  adequate  maintenance  until  situations  are  found,  with 
regard  to  the  three  million  civil  workers  in  war  trades,  and 
male  or  female  substitutes  for  men  now  with  the  colours,  as  for 
the  five  millions  to  be  discharged  from  the  army. 


APPENDIX  V  399 

6.      THE    RESTORATION    OF    TRADE    UNION    CONDITIONS 

(i.)  That  this  conference  reminds  the  government  that  it 
is  pledged  unreservedly  and  unconditionally,  and  the  nation 
with  it,  in  the  most  solemn  manner,  to  the  restoration  after 
the  war  of  all  the  rules,  conditions,  and  customs  that  prevailed 
in  the  workshops  before  the  war;  and  to  the  abrogation,  when 
peace  comes,  of  all  the  changes  introduced  not  only  in  the 
national  factories  and  the  5,000  controlled  establishments,  but 
also  in  the  large  number  of  others  to  which  provisions  of  the 
munitions  act  have  been  applied. 

(ii.)  That  the  conference  places  on  record  its  confident  ex- 
pectation and  desire  that  if  any  employers  should  be  so  un- 
scrupulous as  to  hesitate  to  fulfil  this  pledge,  the  government 
will  see  to  it  that,  in  no  industry  and  in  no  district,  is  any  quib- 
bling evasion  permitted  of  an  obligation  in  which  the  whole 
labour  movement  has  an  interest. 

(iii.)  In  view  of  the  unsatisfactory  character  of  the  provi- 
sions in  the  munitions  act  dealing  with  the  restoration  of  trade 
union  customs  after  the  war,  the  conference  calls  upon  the 
government  to  provide  adequate  statutory  machinery  for  re- 
storation : — 

(a)  By  securing  that  all  provisions  in  the  acts  necessary  to 
enforce  restoration  shall  continue  in  operation  for  a  full  year 
after  the  restrictive  provisions  abrogating  trade  union  rules, 
and  giving  munitions  tribunals  disciplinary  powers  over  work- 
men have  been  terminated. 

(b)  By  removing  all  restrictions  upon  the  right  of  the  work- 
men to  strike  for  the  restoration  of  the  customs  which  have 
been  abrogated. 

(c)  By  limiting  compulsory  arbitration  strictly  to  the  war 
period  and  providing  fully  that  the  right  to  prosecute  an  em- 
ployer for  a  failure  to  restore  trade  union  customs  shall  con- 
tinue for  a  full  year  after  the  termination  of  the  restrictive 
powers  in  the  acts. 

(iv.)  The  conference  further  calls  upon  Parliament  to  limit 
all  restrictive  legislation  directed  against  workpeople  strictly 
to  the  war  period,  and,  subject  to  the  above  exceptions,  calls 
for  the  abrogation  of  the  clauses  restrictive  of  personal  liberty 
in  the  munitions  of  war  acts  and  in  the  defence  of  the  realm 
acts,  immediately  upon  the  conclusion  of  hostilities. 

(v.)     The  conference,  finally,  urges  that  if  it  is  considered 


400  APPENDIX  V 

that  some  of  the  rules,  conditions,  and  customs  are,  in  the 
industrial  reorganisation  that  is  contemplated,  inconsistent 
with  the  highest  development  of  production,  or  injurious  to 
other  sections  of  workers,  it  is  for  the  government,  as  re- 
sponsible for  the  fulfilment  of  the  pledge,  to  submit  for  discus- 
sion to  the  trade  unions  concerned  alternative  proposals  for 
securing  the  standard  wage  and  normal  day,  protecting  the 
workers  from  unemployment,  and  maintaining  the  position  and 
dignity  of  the  crafts. 

7.      THE    PREVENTION    OF    UNEMPLOYMENT 

That  the  conference  cannot  ignore  the  likelihood  that  the 
years  immediately  following  the  war  will  include  periods  of 
grave  dislocation  of  profit-making  industry,  now  in  this  trade 
or  locality  and  now  in  that,  when  many  thousands  of  willing 
workers  will,  if  matters  are  left  to  private  capitalism,  probably 
be  walking  the  streets  in  search  of  employment;  that  it  is 
accordingly  the  duty  of  the  ministry,  before  demobilisation  is 
actually  begun,  so  to  arrange  the  next  ten  years'  programme  of 
national  and  local  government  works  and  services — includ- 
ing housing,  schools,  roads,  railways,  canals,  harbours,  affor- 
estation, reclamation,  etc. — as  to  be  able  to  put  this  programme 
in  hand  at  such  a  rate  and  in  such  districts  as  any  temporary 
congestion  of  the  Labour  market  may  require;  that  it  is  high 
time  that  the  government  laid  aside  the  pretence  that  it  has  no 
responsibility  for  preventing  unemployment ;  that  now  that  it  is 
known  that  all  that  is  required  to  prevent  the  occurrence  of 
any  widespread  or  lasting  unemployment  is  that  the  aggre- 
gate total  demand  for  labour  should  be  maintained,  year  in  and 
year  out,  at  an  approximately  even  level,  and  that  this  can  be 
secured  by  nothing  more  difficult  or  more  revolutionary  than  a 
sensible  distribution  of  the  public  orders  for  works  and  serv- 
ices so  as  to  keep  always  up  to  the  prescribed  total  the  ag- 
gregate public  and  capitalist  demand  for  labour,  together  with 
the  prohibition  of  overtime  in  excess  of  the  prescribed  normal 
working  day,  there  is  no  excuse  for  any  government  which  al- 
lows such  a  grave  social  calamity  as  widespread  or  lasting  un- 
employment ever  to  occur. 

8.      UNEMPLOYMENT    INSURANCE 

That  to  meet  the  needs  of  individuals  temporarily  out  of 
work,  the  Labour  Party  holds  that  the  best  provision  is  the 


APPENDIX  V  401 

out-of-work  pay  of  a  strong  trade  union,  duly  supplemented 
by  the  government  subvention  guaranteed  by  Part  II,  of  the 
insurance  act;  that  the  government  should  at  once  restore  the 
subvention  now  withdrawn  by  one  of  the  least  excusable  of  the 
war  economies ;  that  this  subvention  ought  to  be  increased  so 
as  to  amount  to  at  least  half  the  weekly  allowance;  and  that 
for  the  succour  of  those  for  whom  trade  union  organisation  is 
not  available  the  state  unemployment  benefit,  raised  to  an 
adequate  sum,  should  be  made  universally  applicable  in  all  in- 
dustries and  occupations  where  objection  is  not  taken  by  the 
trade  union  concerned  to  the  compulsory  inclusion  of  its  mem- 
bers. 

9.      THE    COMPLETE    EMANCIPATION    OF    WOMEN 

That  the  conference  holds  that  the  changes  in  the  position  of 
women  during  the  war,  in  which  they  have  rendered  such  good 
service,  and  the  importance  of  securing  to  women  as  to  men,  the 
fullest  poss«e  opportunities  for  individual  development,  make 
it  necessary  to  pay  special  attention  in  the  reconstruction  pro- 
gramme to  matters  afifecting  women;  and,  in  particular,  the 
conference  affirms 

A. — With  Regard  to  Industry  on  Demobilisation  :— 

(i.)  That  work  or  maintenance  at  fair  rates  should  be  pro- 
vided for  all  women  displaced  from  their  employment  to  make 
way  for  men  returning  from  service  with  the  forces  or  other 
national  work. 

(ii.)  That  full  inquiry  should  be  made  into  trades  and  proc- 
esses previously  held  to  be  unhealthy  or  in  any  way  unsuitable 
for  women,  but  now  being  carried  on  by  them,  with  a  view 
to  making  recommendations  as  to  the  conditions  of  their  fur- 
ther employment  in  such  trades. 

(iii.)  That  all  women  employed  in  trades  formerly  closed 
to  them  should  only  continue  to  be  so  employed  at  trade  union 
rates  of  wages. 

(iv.)  That  trade  unions  should  be  urged  to  accept  women 
members  in  all  trades  in  which  they  are  employed. 

(v.)  That  the  principle  of  equal  pay  for  similar  duties 
should  be  everywhere  adopted. 


402  APPENDIX  V 

B. — With  Regard  to  Civic  Rights: — 

(i.)  That  all  legal  restrictions  on  the  entry  of  women  to 
the  professions  on  the  same  conditions  as  men  should  be  abro- 
gated. 

(ii.)  That  women  should  have  all  franchises,  and  be  elig- 
ible for  election  to  all  public  bodies  (including  Parliament), 
on  the  same  conditions  as  men. 

(iii.)  That  systematic  provision  should  be  made  for  the  in- 
clusion of  women  in  committees  or  commissions,  national  or 
local,  dealing  with  any  subjects  that  are  not  of  exclusively 
masculine  interest. 

(iv.)  That  the  present  unjust  provision  of  the  income  tax 
law,  under  which  the  married  woman  is  not  treated  as  an 
independent  human  being,  even  in  respect  of  her  own  property 
or  earnings,  must  be  at  once  repealed. 

10.      THE    RESTORATION    OF    PERSONAL    LIBERTY 

That  this  conference  regards  as  fundamental  the  immediate 
repeal  and  abrogation,  as  soon  as  the  war  ends,  of  the  whole 
system  of  the  military  service  acts,  and  of  all  the  provisions  of 
the  defence  of  the  realm  acts  restricting  freedom  of  speech, 
freedom  of  publication,  freedom  of  the  press,  freedom  of  travel, 
and  freedom  of  choice  of  residence  or  of  occupation. 

II.      POLITICAL   REFORMS 

That  the  conference  reaffirms  its  conviction  that  no  lasting 
settlement  of  the  question  of  political  reform  can  be  reached 
without  a  genuine  adoption  of 

(a)  complete  adult  suffrage,  with  not  more  than  three 
months'  residential  qualification; 

{b)   absolutely  equal  rights  for  both  sexes; 

(c)  effective  provision  for  absent  electors  to  vote  and  the 
best  practicable  arrangements  for  ensuring  that  every  minority 
has  its  proportionate  and  no  more  than  its  proportionate  repre- 
sentation ; 

{d)  the  same  civic  rights  for  the  soldiers  and  sailors,  as  for 
the  officers ; 

(e)   shorter  Parliaments;   and 

(/)  the  complete  abandonment  of  any  attempt  to  control  the 
people's  representatives  by  a  House  of  Lords. 


APPENDIX  V  403 

That  the  conference  especially  protests  against  the  defects 
of  the  representation  of  the  people  act  of  last  year,  which  failed 
to  give  votes  to  women  under  thirty  years  of  age,  denied  them 
the  right  to  sit  in  parliament,  maintained  for  both  sexes  an 
unnecessarily  long  period  of  residence  as  a  qualification  for 
the  register,  ignored  the  rights  of  the  civilian  electors  who  may 
be  compulsorily  away  from  home  on  polling  day,  and  omitted 
any  provision  which  would  have  prevented  the  scandal  of  large 
sections  of  the  voters  remaining  unrepresented  whilst  members 
are  returned  to  Parliament  by  a  minority  of  the  voting  con- 
stituency. 

It  protests,  moreover,  against  civil  servants  being  denied  the 
right,  which  has  long  been  enjoyed  by  army  and  navy  officers, 
without  at  once  resigning  their  appointments,  of  offering  them- 
selves to  the  electors  as  Parliamentary  candidates. 

This  conference  calls  for  the  abolition  of  the  House  of 
Lords  without  replacement  of  any  second  chamber.  The  con- 
ference further  protests  against  the  disenfranchisement  of  con- 
scientious objectors. 

12.      IRELAND 

That  the  conference  unhesitatingly  recognises  the  claim  of 
the  people  of  Ireland  to  Home  Rule,  and  to  self-determination 
in  all  exclusively  Irish  affairs;  it  protests  against  the  stub- 
born resistance  to  a  democratic  reorganisation  of  Irish  govern- 
ment maintained  by  those  who,  alike  in  Ireland  and  Great 
Britain,  are  striving  to  keep  minorities  dominant;  and  it  de- 
mands that  a  wide  and  generous  measure  of  Home  Rule  should 
be  immediately  passed  into  law  and  put  in  operation. 


13.      CONSTITUTIONAL  DEVOLUTION 

That  the  conference  regards  as  extremely  grave  the  proved 
incapacity  of  the  War  Cabinet  and  the  House  of  Commons  to 
get  through  even  the  most  urgently  needed  work ;  it  considers 
that  some  early  devolution  from  Westminster  of  both  legisla- 
tion and  administration  is  imperatively  called  for;  it  suggests 
that,  along  with  the  grant  of  Home  Rule  to  Ireland,  there  should 
be  constituted  separate  statutory  legislative  assemblies  for  Scot- 
land, Wales,  and  even  England,  with  autonomous  administra- 
tion in  matters  of  local  concern;  and  that  the  Parliament  at 


404  APPENDIX  V 

Westminster  should  be  retained  in  the  form  of  a  Federal  As- 
sembly for  the  United  Kingdom,  controlling  the  ministers  re- 
sponsible for  the  departments  of  the  federal  government,  who 
would  form  also,  together  with  ministers  representing  the 
dominions  and  India  whenever  these  can  be  brought  in,  the 
Cabinet  for  Commonwealth  affairs  for  the  Britannic  Common- 
wealth as  a  whole. 


14.      LOCAL  GOVERNMENT 

That  in  order  to  avoid  the  evils  of  centralisation  and  the 
drawbacks  of  bureaucracy,  the  conference  suggests  that  the 
fullest  possible  scope  should  be  given,  in  all  branches  of  social 
reconstruction,  to  the  democratically  elected  local  governing 
bodies;  that  whilst  the  central  government  departments  should 
assist  with  information  and  grants  in  aid,  the  local  authorities 
should  be  given  a  free  hand  to  develop  their  own  services,  over 
and  above  the  prescribed  national  minimum,  in  whatever  way 
they  choose;  that  they  should  be  empowered  to  obtain  capital 
from  the  government  at  cost  price,  and  to  acquire  land  cheaply 
and  expeditiously,  for  any  of  the  functions  with  which  they  are 
entrusted. 

The  conference  holds,  moreover,  that  the  municipalities  and 
county  councils  should  not  confine  themselves  to  the  neces- 
sarily costly  services  of  education,  sanitation,  and  police,  and 
the  functions  to  be  taken  over  from  the  boards  of  guardians, 
nor  yet  rest  content  with  acquiring  control  of  the  local  water, 
gas,  electricity  and  tramways,  but  that  they  should  greatly 
extend  their  enterprises  in  housing  and  town  planning,  parks, 
and  public  libraries,  the  provision  of  music  and  the  organisation 
of  popular  recreation,  and  also  that  they  should  be  empowered 
to  undertake,  not  only  the  retailing  of  coal,  but  also  other 
services  of  common  utility,  particularly  the  local  supply  of  milk, 
where  this  is  not  already  fully  and  satisfactorily  organised 
by  a  co-operative  society. 

Further,  that  in  view  of  the  great  and  growing  importance 
of  local  government,  this  conference  thinks  it  high  time  that 
the  councillors  should  again  be  required  to  submit  themselves 
for  election,  that,  on  the  first  election,  at  any  rate,  the  whole 
of  each  council  should  vacate  their  seats  and  the  new  council  be 
elected  on  the  principle  of  proportional  representation,  and  that 
in  order  to  throw  the  position  open  to  all  persons,  rich  or  poor, 


APPENDIX  V  40s 

all  councillors  should  be  provided  with  payment  for  any  neces- 
sary travelling  expenses,  and  for  the  time  spent  on  the  public 
service. 

15.      EDUCATION 

That  the  conference  holds  that  the  most  important  of  all  the 
measures  ot  social  reconstruction  must  be  a  genuine  nationalisa- 
tion of  education,  which  shall  get  rid  of  all  class  distinctions 
and  privileges,  and  bring  effectively  within  the  reach,  not  only 
of  every  boy  and  girl,  but  also  of  every  adult  citizen,  all  the 
training,  physical,  mental  and  moral,  literary,  technical,  and 
artistic  of  which  he  is  capable. 

That  the  conference,  whilst  appreciating  the  advances  indi- 
cated by  the  proposals  of  the  present  minister  of  education,  de- 
clares that  the  Labour  Party  cannot  be  satisfied  with  a  system 
which  condemns  the  great  bulk  of  the  children  to  merely  ele- 
mentary schooling  with  accommodation  and  equipment  inferior 
to  that  of  the  secondary  schools,  in  classes  too  large  for  efficient 
instruction,  under  teachers  of  whom  at  least  one-third  are  in- 
sufficiently trained;  which  denies  to  the  great  majority  of  the 
teachers  in  the  kingdom,  whether  in  elementary  or  in  sec- 
ondary schools  (and  notably  to  most  of  the  women),  alike  any 
opportunity  for  all-round  culture,  as  well  as  for  training  in 
their  art,  an  adequate  wage,  reasonable  prospects  of  advance- 
ment, and  suitable  superannuation  allowances;  and  which,  not- 
withstanding what  is  yet  done  by  way  of  scholarships  for  ex- 
ceptional geniuses,  still  reserves  the  endowed  secondary  schools, 
and  even  more  the  universities,  for  the  most  part,  to  the  sons 
and  daughters  of  a  small  privileged  class,  whilst  contemplating 
nothing  better  than  eight  weeks  a  year  continuation  schooling 
up  to  19  for  90  per  cent  of  the  youth  of  the  nation. 

The  conference  accordingly  asks  for  a  systematic  reorganisa- 
tion of  the  whole  educational  system,  from  the  nursery  school 
to  the  university,  on  the  basis  of 

(a)  social  equality. 

(b)  the  provision  for  each  age,  for  child,  youth,  and  adult, 
of  the  best  and  most  varied  education  of  which  it  is  capable, 
and  with  due  regard  to  its  physical  welfare  and  development, 
but  without  any  form  of  military  training; 

(c)  the  educational  institutions,  irrespective  of  social  class  or 
wealth,  to  be  planned,  equipped,  and  staffed  according  to  their 
several  functions,  up  to  the  same  high  level  for  elementary,  sec- 


4o6  APPENDIX  V 

ondary,  or  university  teaching,  with  regard  solely  to  the  greatest 
possible  educational  efficiency,  and  free  maintenance  of  such  a 
kind  as  to  enable  the  children  to  derive  the  full  benefit  of  the 
education  given ;  and 

(d)  the  recognition  of  the  teaching  profession,  without  dis- 
tinction of  grade,  as  one  of  the  most  valuable  to  the  com- 
munity. 

l6.      HOUSING 

That  the  conference,  noting  the  fact  that  the  shortage  of 
habitable  cottages  in  the  United  Kingdom  now  exceeds  one  mil- 
lion, and  that  the  rent  and  mortgages  restriction  act  is  due  to 
expire  six  months  after  peace,  regards  a  national  campaign  of 
cottage  building  at  the  public  expense,  in  town  and  country 
alike,  as  the  most  urgent  of  social  requirements. 

That  the  attention  of  the  government  be  called  to  the  fact 
that,  unless  steps  are  taken  to  insist  that  the  local  authorities 
acquire  the  necessary  sites,  prepare  schemes,  plans,  and  specifi- 
cations, and  obtain  all  required  sanctions,  actually  before  the 
war  ends  there  is  very  little  chance  of  the  half-a-million  new 
cottages  urgently  needed  in  England,  Scotland,  Ireland,  and 
Wales  during  the  very  first  year  of  demobilisation  being  ready 
for  occupation  within  that  time. 

That  it  is  essential  that  the  "Million  Cottages  of  the  Great 
Peace,"  to  be  erected  during  the  first  two  or  three  years  after 
the  war  ends  by  the  local  authorities,  with  capital  supplied  by  the 
national  government,  free  of  interest,  and  a  grant-in-aid  in 
one  or  other  form  at  least  sufficient  to  prevent  the  schemes  in- 
volving any  charge  on  the  rates,  should  be  worthy  to  serve  as 
models  to  other  builders;  and  must  accordingly  be,  not  only 
designed  with  some  regard  to  appearance,  not  identical  through- 
out the  land,  but  adapted  to  local  circumstances,  and  soundly 
constructed,  spacious,  and  healthy;  including  four  or  five 
rooms,  larder,  scullery,  cupboards,  and  fitted  bath  but  also  suit- 
ably grouped  not  more  than  ten  or  twelve  to  the  acre;  and 
provided  with  sufficient  garden  ground. 

17.      THE    ABOLITION    OF    THE    POOR    LAW    AND    THE   DEVELOPMENT 
OF    THE    MUNICIPAL    HEALTH    SERVICE 

That  the  conference  notes  with  satisfaction  the  decision  of 
the  government  both  to  establish  a  Ministry  of  Health  and  to 
abolish  the  whole  system  and  organisation  of  the  poor  law. 


APPENDIX  V  407 

It  regards  the  immediate  reorganisation,  in  town  and  country- 
alike,  of  the  public  provision  for  the  prevention  and  treatment 
of  disease,  and  the  care  of  the  orphans,  the  infirm,  the  in- 
capacitated, and  the  aged  needs  institutional  care,  as  an  indis- 
pensable basis  of  any  sound  social  reconstruction. 

It  calls  for  the  prompt  carrying  out  of  the  government's 
declared  intention  of  abolishing,  not  merely  the  boards  of 
guardians,  but  also  the  hated  workhouse  and  the  poor  law 
itself,  and  the  merging  of  the  work  heretofore  done  for  the 
destitute  as  paupers  in  that  performed  by  the  directly  elected 
county,  borough,  and  district  councils  for  the  citizens  as  such, 
without  either  the  stigma  of  pauperism  or  the  hampering  limi- 
tations of  the  poor  law  system. 

It  feels  that  only  in  connection  with  such  a  reorganisation  of 
the  local  health  services — urgently  required  to  meet  the  dan- 
gers attendant  on  demobilisation — can  a  Ministry  of  Health 
be  of  effective  advantage  to  the  nation. 

18.      TEMPERANCE  REFORM 

That  the  conference  records  its  sense  of  the  great  social  evil 
and  national  waste  caused  by  the  excessive  consumption  of 
alcoholic  liquors,  and  by  the  unfortunate  intemperance  of  a 
relatively  small  section  of  the  population ;  that  the  conference 
sees  the  key  to  temperance  reform  in  taking  the  entire  manu- 
facture and  retailing  of  alcoholic  drink  out  of  the  hands  of 
those  who  find  profit  in  promoting  the  utmost  possible  con- 
sumption ;  and  the  conference  holds  that  in  conjunction  with 
any  expropriation  of  the  private  interests  the  electors  of  each 
locality  should  be  enabled  to  decide,  as  they  may  see  fit : 

(i)  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  alcoholic  drink  within  their  own 
boundaries ; 

(2)  to  reduce  the  number  of  places  of  sales,  and  to  regulate 
the  conditions  of  sale ; 

(3)  to  determine,  within  the  fundamental  conditions  pre- 
scribed by  statute,  the  manner  in  which  the  public  places  of 
refreshment  and  social  intercourse  in  their  own  districts 
should  be  organised  and  controlled. 

19.      RAILWAYS  AND  CANALS 

That  the  conference  insists  on  the  retention  in  public  hands 
of  the  railways  and  canals,  and  on  the  expropriation  of  the 


4o8  APPENDIX  V 

present  stockholders  on  equitable  terms,  in  order  to  permit  of 
the  organisation,  in  conjuction  with  the  harbours  and  docks, 
and  the  posts  and  telegraphs,  of  a  united  national  public 
service  of  communications  and  transport,  to  be  worked,  un- 
hampered by  any  private  interest  (and  with  a  steadily  increas- 
ing participation  of  the  organised  workers  in  the  management, 
both  central  and  local)  exclusively  for  the  common  good. 

The  conference  places  on  record  that  if  any  government 
shall  be  so  misguided  as  to  propose,  when  peace  comes,  to  hand 
the  railways  back  to  the  shareholders,  or  should  show  itself  so 
spendthrift  of  the  nation's  property  as  to  give  the  companies 
any  enlarged  franchise  by  presenting  them  with  the  economics 
of  unification  or  the  profits  of  increased  railway  rates,  or  so 
extravagant  as  to  bestow  public  funds  on  the  re-equipment  of 
privately-owned  lines,  the  Labour  Party  will  offer  any  such 
project  its  most  strenuous  opposition. 

20.      THE   NEW   ELECTRICITY   SUPPLY 

With  regard  to  the  generation  of  electricity  for  the  provision, 
both  for  the  factory  and  the  home,  of  the  cheapest  possible 
power,  light  and  heat,  the  conference  declares  that  the  Labour 
Party  stands  for  the  provision,  by  the  government  itself,  of  the 
score  of  gigantic  super-power  stations  by  which  the  whole 
kingdom  could  be  supplied,  and  for  thf  linking  up  of  the  present 
municipal  and  joint  stock  services  for  distribution  to  factories 
and  dwelling-houses  at  the  lowest  possible  rates. 

The  conference  notifies  that  the  Labour  Party  will  offer 
the  most  strenuous  opposition  to  this  great  national  service 
being  entrusted,  on  any  terms  whatsoever,  to  private  capitalism. 

21.      COAL    AND    IRON    MINES 

That  the  conference  urges  that  the  coal  mines,  now  under 
government  control,  should  not  be  handed  back  to  their  cap- 
italist proprietors,  but  that  the  measure  of  nationalisation, 
which  became  imperative  during  the  war,  should  be  completed, 
at  the  earliest  possible  moment,  by  the  expropriation  on  equit- 
able terms  of  all  private  interests  in  the  extraction  and  distri- 
bution of  the  nation's  coal  (together  with  iron  ore  and  other 
minerals). 

The  conference  asks  that  the  supply  of  these  minerals  should 
henceforth  be  conducted  as  a  public  service   (with  a  steadily 


APPENDIX  V  409 

increasing  participation  in  the  management,  both  central  and 
local,  of  the  workers  concerned),  for  the  cheapest  and  most 
regular  supply  to  industry  of  its  chief  source  of  power,  the 
retail  distribution  of  household  coal,  at  a  fixed  price,  summer 
and  winter  alike,  and  identical  at  all  railway  stations  throughout 
the  kingdom,  being  undertaken  by  the  elected  municipal  district, 
or  county  council  for  the  common  good. 

22.      LIFE    ASSURANCE 

That  the  conference  declares  that,  partly  as  a  means  of 
affording  increased  security  to  the  tens  of  thousands  of  policy 
holders  whose  bonuses  are  imperilled  by  capital  depreciation 
and  war  risks,  and  partly  in  order  to  free  the  nation  from  the 
burdensome  and  costly  system  of  the  industrial  insurance  com- 
panies, the  state  should  take  over  (with  equitable  compensa- 
tion to  all  interests  affected)  the  whole  function  of  life  as- 
surance, giving  in  place  of  the  present  onerous  industrial 
insurance  policies  a  universal  funeral  benefit  free  of  charge ; 
putting  the  whole  class  of  insurance  agents  in  the  position  of 
civil  servants  administering  the  state  insurance  business ;  de- 
veloping to  the  utmost  the  beneficial  work  of  the  friendly 
societies  in  independence  and  security,  and  organising,  in  con- 
junction with  these  societies,  on  the  most  approved  principles, 
a  safe  and  remunerative  investment  of  popular  savings. 

23.      AGRICULTURAL  AND  RURAL  LIFE 

(i.)  That  the  conference  regards  the  present  arrangements 
for  the  production  and  distribution  of  food  in  this  country, 
and  the  life  to  which  many  thousands  of  country  dwellers  are 
condemned,  as  nothing  short  of  a  national  disgrace,  and  as 
needing  to  be  radically  altered  without  delay. 

(ii.)  That  it  is  essential  that  the  government  should  re- 
sume control  of  the  nation's  agricultural  land,  and  ensure  its 
utilisation  not  for  rent,  not  for  game,  not  for  the  social 
amenity  of  a  small  social  class,  not  even  for  obtaining  the 
largest  percentage  on  the  capital  employed,  but  solely  with  a 
view  to  the  production  of  the  largest  possible  proportion  of 
the  foodstuffs  required  by  the  population  of  these  islands  under 
conditions  allowing  of  a  good  life  to  the  rural  population  and 
at  a  price  not  exceeding  that  for  which  foodstuffs  can  be 
brought  from  other  lands. 


410  APPENDIX  Y 

(iii.)  That  this  end  can  probably  best  be  attained  by  a 
combination  of 

(o)  government  farms,  administered  on  a  large  scale,  with 
the  utmost  use  of  machinery; 

(b)  small  holdings  made  accessible  to  practical  agriculturists; 

(c)  municipal  enterprises  in  agriculture,  in  conjunction  with 
municipal  institutions  of  various  kinds,  milk  depots,  sewage 
works,  etc. ; 

(d)  farms  let  to  co-operative  societies  and  other  tenants, 
under  covenants  requiring  the  kind  of  cultivation  desired. 

(iv.)  That  under  all  systems  the  agricultural  labourer  must 
be  secured  a  healthy  and  commodious  cottage,  with  sufficient 
garden  ground,  the  opportunity  of  getting  an  accessible  allot- 
ment, and,  when  he  so  desires,  a  small  holding,  together  with  a 
wage  continuously  adequate  for  the  requirements  of  body  and 
mind. 

(v.)  That  the  conference  suggests  that  the  distribution  of 
foodstuffs  in  the  towns — from  milk  and  meat  to  bread  and 
vegetables — should,  with  equitable  compensation  for  all  inter- 
ests expropriated  and  persons  displaced,  be  taken  out  of  the 
hands  of  the  present  multiplicity  of  dealers  and  shopkeepers, 
and  organised  by  consumers,  co-operative  societies,  and  the 
local  authorities  working  in  conjunction. 

24.      CONTROL  OF  CAPITALIST  INDUSTRY 

That  the  conference  insists,  especially  in  view  of  the  rapid 
development  of  amalgamations  and  trusts,  on  the  necessity  of 
retaining  after  the  war,  and  of  developing  the  present  system 
of  organising,  controlling,  and  auditing  the  processes,  profits, 
and  prices  of  capitalist  industry;  that  the  economies  of  cen- 
tralised purchasing  of  raw  materials,  foodstuffs,  and  other 
imports  must  be  continued,  and,  therefore,  the  "rationing^'  of 
all  establishments  under  a  collective  control;  that  the  pub- 
licity of  processes  thus  obtained  has  a  valuable  effect  in  bring- 
ing inefficient  firms  up  to  a  higher  level;  that  the  "costing" 
of  manufacturers'  processes  and  auditing  of  their  accounts, 
so  as  to  discover  the  necessary  cost  of  production,  together 
with  the  authoritative  limitation  of  prices  at  the  factory,  the 
wholesale  warehouse  and  the  retail  shop,  affords,  in  industries 
not  nationalised,  the  only  security  against  the  extortion  of 
profiteering;  and  that  it  is  as  much  the  duty  of  the  govern- 


APPENDIX  V  4" 

ment  to  protect  the  consumer  by  limiting  prices  as  it  is  to 
protect  the  factory  operative  from  unhealthy  conditions,  or 
the  householder  from  the  burglar. 

25.      NATIONAL  FINANCE 

1.  That  in  view  of  the  enormous  debts  contracted  during 
the  war,  and  of  the  necessity  to  lighten  national  financial  bur- 
dens, this  conference  demands  that  an  equitable  system  of  con- 
scription of  accumulated  wealth  should  be  put  into  operation 
forthwith,  with  exemption  for  fortunes  below  f  1,000,  and  a 
graduated  scale  of  rates  for  larger  totals,  believing  that  no  sys- 
tem of  taxation  only  of  income  or  profits  will  yield  enough 
to  free  the  country  from  oppressive  debts,  and  that  any  attempt 
to  tax  food  or  the  other  necessities  of  life  would  be  unjust 
and  ruinous  to  the  masses  of  the  people. 

2.  That  the  only  solution  of  the  difficulties  that  have  arisen 
is  a  system  by  which  the  necessary  national  income  shall  be 
derived  mainly  from  direct  taxation  alike  of  land  and  accu- 
mulated wealth,  and  of  income  and  profits,  together  with 
suitable  imposts  upon  luxuries,  and  that  the  death  duties  and 
the  taxation  upon  unearned  incomes  should  be  substantially 
increased  and  equitably  regarded. 

3.  That  the  whole  system  of  land  taxation  should  be  re- 
vised so  that  by  the  direct  taxation  of  the  unearned  increment 
of  land  values  effect  should  be  given  to  the  fact  that  the  land 
of  the  nation,  which  has  been  defended  by  the  lives  and  suffer- 
ings of  its  people,  shall  belong  to  the  nation,  and  be  used  for 
the  nation's  benefit. 

4.  That  this  conference  emphatically  protests  against  the 
subjection  of  co-operative  dividends  to  the  excess  profits  tax 
and  against  the  repeated  attempts  to  bring  co-operative  divi- 
dends within  the  scope  of  the  income  tax. 

5.  That  as  during  the  war  the  government  has  had  to  come 
to  the  assistance  of  the  banking  institutions  of  the  country,  and 
that  it  has  been  found  necessary  to  pay  very  high  rates  for 
the  money  raised,  adding  considerably  to  the  annual  burden 
resulting  from  the  war,  whilst  the  banks  are  now  pursuing  a 
policy  of  fusion  such  as  brings  them  near  to  the  position  of^ 
a  monopoly,  the  Post  Office  Savings  Bank  should  be  developed 
into  a  national  banking  system  for  the  common  service  of  the 
whole  community. 


412  APPENDIX  V 

26.      THE   NEED   FOR    A    "PEACE    BOOk" 

That  in  the  opinion  of  this  conference  the  problem  of  the 
social  and  industrial  reconstruction  of  Great  Britain  after  the 
war  is  of  such  grave  importance  and  of  such  vital  urgency, 
that  it  is  imperative,  in  order  to  avoid  confusion  in  the  period 
of  demobilisation,  that  the  main  outlines  of  policy  in  all 
branches  should  be  definitely  formulated,  upon  the  responsi- 
bility of  the  minister  of  reconstruction,  before  the  war  ends, 
so  that  they  can  be  published  in  a  Peace  Book  for  public  criti- 
cism before  being  finally  adopted  by  the  Cabinet,  for  the  au- 
thoritative guidance  of  all  ministers  and  heads  of  departments. 

27.    "labour  and  the  new  social  order" 

That  the  draft  report  on  reconstruction,  entitled  Labour  and 
the  New  Social  Order,  be  revised  after  consideration  of  all  the 
amendments  suggested,  and  in  accordance  with  the  decisions 
of  the  conference,  and  that  every  constituent  organisation  be 
asked  to  report  within  four  weeks  how  many  copies  it  pro- 
poses to  order  for  distribution  to  its  branches  and  members. 


APPENDIX  VI 

PLATFORM  OF  BRITISH  LABOUR  PARTY  IN  THE 
GENERAL  ELECTIONS,  DECEMBER,  1918 

Under  the  new  constitution  of  the  Labour  Party  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  National  Executive  in  conjunction  with 
the  Labour  Party  members  of  Parliament  to  define  before 
any  general  election  the  particular  issues  which  should  be 
made  the  party  programme.  Following  is  the  text  of  the 
resolution  passed  by  an  emergency  conference  November  14, 
191 8,  summarising  the  reconstruction  policy  of  the  party  as 
embodied  in  the  revised  edition  of  the  pamphlet  "Labour  and 
the  Social  Order": 

INTERNATIONAL 

Now  that  peace  is  at  hand,  the  Labour  Party  feels  justified 
in  putting  forward  its  demand  that  the  promise  made  when 
its  members  joined  the  last  Coalition  Government  in  Decem- 
ber, 1916,  that  Labour  should  have  representation  at  the  official 
Peace  Congress,  should  be  redeemed.  It  reaffirms  the  declar- 
ation of  the  Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist  Conferences 
of  February  and  September,  1918,  that  because  of  their  re- 
sponse in  defence  of  the  principles  of  freedom  the  peoples 
have  earned  the  right  to  wipe  out  all  vestiges  of  the  old  idea 
that  the  Government  belongs  to  or  constitutes  "a  governing 
class."  In  determining  issues  that  will  vitally  affect  the  lives 
and  welfare  of  millions  of  wage-earners,  justice  requires  that 
they  should  have  direct  representation  in  the  Conferences 
authorised  to  make  such  decisions. 

In  common  with  the  other  Labour  and  Socialist  organisa- 
tions in  the  Allied  countries,  Labour  also  declared  in  favour  of 
a  World  Labour  Congress  at  the  conclusion  of  hostilities  with 
a  view  to  the  foundations  of  an  effective  League  of  Nations 
being  laid  upon  a  genuine  democratic  basis,  and  also  in  view 
of  the  need  for  an  international  agreement  for  the  enforce- 

413 


414  APPENDIX  VI 

ment  in  all  countries  of  uniform  legislation  on  factory  condi- 
tions, maximum  working  hours,  the  prevention  of  sweating 
and  unhealthy  trades,  and  similar  industrial  reforms. 

The  Executive  Committee,  therefore,  recommend  that  the 
Emergency  Conference  should  adopt  the  following  resolution : — 

"That  this  Special  Emergency  Conference  of  the  Labour 
Party  reaffirms  the  demand  of  the  Inter-Allied  Conferences  of 
February  and  September,  1918 — 

"(i)  That,  in  the  official  delegations  from  each  of  the  bel- 
ligerent countries  which  formulate  the  Peace  Treaty,  the 
workers  should  have  direct  official  representation. 

"(2)  That  a  World  Labour  Congress  should  be  held  at  the 
same  time  and  place  as  the  Peace  Conference  that  will  formu- 
late the  Peace  Treaty  closing  the  war. 

"(3)  That  this  Conference  demands  that  the  Government 
should  afford  facilities  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  above  pro- 
posals." 

NATIONAL  RECONSTRUCTION 

The  Labour  Party  protests  against  any  patching  up  of  the 
old  economic  order.  It  declines  to  go  back  to  the  conditions 
of  penury  and  starvation  which  were  all  that  society  used  to 
allow  to  millions  of  workers.  It  stands  for  such  a  systematic 
reconstruction  of  industrial  and  social  relations  as  will  give  to 
the  workers  by  hand  or  by  brain  the  full  fruits  of  their  labour. 

The  Labour  Party  demands  the  wide  measures  of  reform  that 
are  described  in  "Labour  and  the  New  Social  Order,"  which 
include : — 

1.  A  just  and  generous  provision  for  the  discharged  soldiers 
and  sailors,  apart  from  either  charity  or  the  Poor  Law,  alike 
in  respect  of  pensions,  medical  and  surgical  treatment,  rein- 
statement in  civil  employment  at  trade  union  rates  of  wages, 
and  complete  security  against  involuntary  unemployment. 

2.  Full  provision  for  the  civil  war  workers  to  be  discharged 
on  the  conclusion  of  the  war,  and  others  whom  the  dislocation 
of  industry  will  throw  out  of  work,  including  adequate  arrange- 
ments for  placing  in  new  situations  as  soon  as  possible  and 
maintenance  during  involuntary  unemployment. 

3.  The  complete  fulfilment  of  the  nation's  pledge  to  the 
trade  unionists  that  they  should  be  unconditionally  reinstated 
in  respect  of  the  trade  union  conditions  and  workshop  customs 


APPENDIX  VI  41 S 

abrogated  in  the  public  interest;  or  else  that  the  Government 
should  submit  for  their  acceptance  measures  calculated  to 
achieve  the  same  ends. 

4.  The  complete  restoration  of  freedom  of  speech,  publica- 
tion, travel,  residence,  and  choice  of  occupation,  and  the  aboli- 
tion of  all  compulsory  military  service. 

5.  The  completion  of  political  democracy  by  adult  suffrage, 
equal  rights  of  voting  for  both  sexes,  and  the  abolition  of  any 
Second  Chamber  presuming  to  limit  or  control  the  supremacy 
of  the  popularly  elected  House  of  Commons. 

6.  The  immediate  application  to  Ireland  of  the  fullest  pos- 
sible measure  of  Home  Rule. 

7.  Provision  for  the  greatly  increased  efficiency  of  the 
Legislature  by  the  devolution  of  English,  Scottish,  and  Welsh 
business  to  separate  local  legislatures  united  in  a  Federal 
Parliament. 

8.  The  retention  by  the  State  of  the  railways  and  canals, 
the  expropriation  of  the  shareholders  on  equitable  terms,  and 
the  organisation  under  public  control,  or  a  national  system  of 
transport  worked  for  exclusively  public  objects. 

9.  The  retention  by  the  State  of  the  coal  and  iron  mines, 
the  expropriation  of  the  present  owners  on  equitable  terms, 
and  the  organisation  by  the  National  Government  and  the  local 
authorities  of  the  supply  of  coal  as  a  public  service. 

10.  The  provision  and  management  by  the  Government 
itself,  in  conjunction  with  the  local  authorities,  of  the  proposed 
gigantic  super-power  stations  by  which  electricity  can  be  pro- 
vided at  the  lowest  possible  cost,  without  toll  to  the  capitalist 
companies,    for  both   industrial   and  domestic  purposes. 

11.  The  effective  maintenance  of  the  standard  of  life  for 
the  whole  nation  by  the  suitable  amendment  and  extension  of 
the  Factories,  Mines,  Trade  Boards,  and  similar  Acts. 

12.  The  revision  of  the  rates,  age  for  eligibility,  and  con- 
ditions of  old-age  pensions,  so  as  to  make  the  statutory  pen- 
sion an  absolute  right  of  every  person  of  pensionable  age. 

13.  The  abolition  of  the  Poor  Law  and  the  merging  of  its 
present  services  in  those  already  rendered  by  the  directly 
elected  local  authorities  to  the  children,  the  sick  and  infirm 
(including  maternity  and  infancy),  the  mentally  defective,  the 
aged,  and  the  able-bodied  unemployed,  stimulated,  aided,  and 
controlled  by  an  effective  Ministry  of  Health,  whilst  suitable 


4i6  APPENDIX  VI 

measures  for  the  prevention  of  unemployment,  and  the  secur- 
ing of  situations  for  the  unemployed  are  taken  by  a  Ministry 
of  Employment. 

14.  The  extension  of  the  powers  of  county,  borough,  dis- 
trict, and  parish  councils,  alike  in  respect  of  the  acquisition 
of  land,  the  reform  of  the  system  of  assessment  and  rating, 
the  obtaining  of  additional  grants-in-aid,  and  freedom  to  under- 
take all  the  services  desired  by  their  constituents,  together  with 
the  immediate  resumption  of  local  elections  with  proportional 
representation. 

15.  The  prompt  carrying  through  of  a  comprehensive  na- 
tional measure  of  housing,  the  local  authorities  being  every- 
where required,  with  grants-in-aid  sufficient  to  prevent  any 
charge  on  the  rates,  to  make  good  the  whole  of  the  existing 
shortage  in  well-planned,  well-built,  commodious,  and  healthy 
homes  for  the  entire  population. 

16.  The  reorganisation  of  agriculture  and  rural  life  by  the 
resumption  by  the  State  of  its  ownership  of  the  land,  and  its 
use  as  State  farms,  small  holdings,  and  allotments,  or  coopera- 
tive enterprises,  in  such  a  way  as  to  secure  the  greatest  pos- 
sible production,  not  of  game  or  of  rent,  but  of  the  people's 
food,  together  with  standard  wages  for  all  the  workers  em- 
ployed, adequate  security  for  the  farmer's  enterprise,  healthy 
dwellings  for  all  the  country  population,  and  the  development 
of  village  life  and  civilisation. 

17.  A  national  system  of  education,  free  and  effectively 
open  to  all  persons,  irrespective  of  their  means,  from  the 
nursery  school  to  the  university;  based  on  the  principle  of 
extending  to  persons  of  all  ages,  without  distinction  of  class  or 
wealth  and  without  any  taint  of  militarism,  genuine  opportuni- 
ties for  the  most  effective  education  on  a  broad  and  liberal 
basis,  and  the  provision  for  teachers  of  all  kinds  and  grades 
of  salaries,  pensions,  training,  and  opportunities  of  advance- 
ment commensurate  with  the  high  social  importance  of  their 
calling. 

18.  The  nationalisation  of  life  assurance,  with  equitable 
compensation  to  the  shareholders  and  complete  provision  for 
all  persons  now  employed,  in  order  both  to  place  beyond  doubt 
the  security  of  the  existing  policies  and  to  supersede  the 
present  costly  and  objectionable  system  of  industrial  life  assur- 


APPENDIX  VI  417 

ance  by  a  universal  provision   of   funeral  benefit,   free   from 
the  weekly  house-to-house  collection  of  the  people's  pence. 

19.  The  protection  of  the  public  against  the  "money  trust," 
now  rapidly  being  formed  through  the  banking  amalgamations, 
by  means  of  the  development  of  the  Post  Office  Savings  Bank 
into  a  universal  national  banking  system,  carried  on  without 
capitalist  control,  and  the  nationalisation,  with  equitable  com- 
pensation to  the  shareholders,  of  the  banking  companies  to  be 
absorbed. 

20.  The  most  strenuous  resistance  to  any  attempt  to  saddle 
the  cost  of  the  war  and  the  National  Debt  upon  the  consumers 
by  any  system  of  taxation  of  food  or  commodities  of  popular 
consumption,  or  by  Customs  or  Excise  duties  on  anything  but 
luxuries,  or  by  any  special  taxation  of  cooperative  societies  or 
of  wages.  The  Labour  Party  would  have  the  nation  pay  its  way 
by  adjusting  taxation  strictly  according  to  the  ability  to  bear 
it.  This  requires  the  raising  of  the  exemption  limit,  a  much 
steeper  graduation  and  increase  of  the  super-tax,  the  taking 
of  unearned  increment  by  the  taxation  of  land  values,  the 
doubling  or  trebling  of  the  death  duties,  and  the  "conscription 
of  wealth."  This  means  the  substitution  for  a  large  part  of 
the  existing  income-tax  of  a  carefully  graduated  capital  tax, 
exempting  possessions  under  £1,000  and  taxing  very  lightly 
those  under  £5,000. 

Other  Resolutions 

This  Conference  is  of  opinion  that  in  the  new  Parliament 
following  the  coming  General  Election  the  Labour  Party  should 
be  free  to  promote  its  reconstruction  policy  in  the  most  effec- 
tive manner  that  the  Parliamentary  situation  will  permit.  It 
meantime  declares  that  a  General  Election  held  for  the  pur- 
pose of  choosing  a  Parliament  to  carry  on  the  business  of  the 
country  after  the  war  terminates  the  conditions  under  which 
the  party  entered  the  Coalition,  and  it  determines  that  the 
party  shall  resume  its  independence  and  withdraw  its  members 
from  the  Government  at  the  close  of  the  present  Parliament. 

That  in  the  official  delegations  from  each  of  the  belligerent 
countries  which  formulate  the  Peace  Treaty  the  workers  should 
have  direct  official  representation; 

That  a  World  Labour  Congress  should  be  held  at  the  same 
time  and  place  as  the  Peace  Conference  that  will  formulate  the 
Peace  Treaty  closing  the  war. 


APPENDIX  VII 

INTERIM  REPORT  ON  JOINT  STANDING  INDUSTRIAL 
COUNCILS 

SUB-COMMITTEE   ON    RELATIONS   BETWEEN   EMPLOYERS    AND 
employed;     RECONSTRUCTION     COMMITTEE 

To   the   Right   Honourable   D.   Lloyd   George,   M.   P.,   Prime 
Minister. 
Sir,     We  have  the  honour  to  submit  the  following  Interim 
Report  on  Joint  Standing  Industrial  Councils. 

2.  The  terms  of  reference  to  the  Sub-Committee  are: — 
"(i)  To  make  and  consider  suggestions  for  securing  a  per- 
manent improvement  in  the  relations  between  employers  and 
workmen. 

"(2)  To  recommend  means  for  securing  that  industrial  con- 
ditions affecting  the  relations  between  employers  and  work- 
men shall  be  systematically  reviewed  by  those  concerned,  with  a 
view  to  improving  conditions  in  the  future." 

3.  After  a  general  consideration  of  our  duties  in  relation  to 
the  matters  referred  to  us,  we  decided  first  to  address  ourselves 
to  the  problem  of  establishing  permanently  improved  relations 
between  employers  and  employed  in  the  main  industries  of  the 
country,  in  which  there  exist  representative  organisations  on 
both  sides.  The  present  report  accordingly  deals  more  espe- 
cially with  these  trades.  We  are  proceeding  with  the  con- 
sideration of  the  problems  connected  with  the  industries  which 
are  less   well  organised. 

4.  We  appreciate  that  under  the  pressure  of  the  war  both 
employers  and  workpeople  and  their  organisations  are  very 
much  preoccupied,  but,  notwithstanding,  we  believe  it  to  be 
of  the  highest  importance  that  our  proposals  should  be  put 
before  those  concerned  without  delay,  so  that  employers  and 
employed  may  meet  in  the  near  future  and  discuss  the  problems 
before  them. 

418 


APPENDIX  VII  419 

5.  The  circumstances  of  the  present  time  are  admitted  on 
all  sides  to  offer  a  great  opportunity  for  securing  a  permanent 
improvement  in  the  relations  between  employers  and  employed, 
while  failure  to  utilise  the  opportunity  may  involve  the  nation 
in  grave  industrial  difficulties  at  the  end  of  the  war. 

It  is  generally  allowed  that  the  war  almost  enforced  some 
reconstruction  of  industry,  and  in  considering  the  subjects  re- 
ferred to  us  we  have  kept  in  view  the  need  for  securing  in  the 
development  of  reconstruction  the  largest  possible  measure  of 
co-operation  between  employers  and  employed. 

In  the  interests  of  the  community  it  is  vital  that  after  the 
war  the  co-operation  of  all  classes,  established  during  the 
war,  should  continue,  and  more  especially  with  regard  to  the 
relations  between  employers  and  employed.  For  securing  im- 
provement in  the  latter,  it  is  essential  that  any  proposals  put 
forward  should  offer  to  workpeople  the  means  of  attaining 
improved  conditions  of  employment  and  a  higher  standard  of 
comfort  generally,  and  involve  the  enlistment  of  their  active 
and  continuous  co-operation  in  the  promotion  of  industry. 

To  this  end,  the  establishment  for  each  industry  of  an  organ- 
isation, representative  of  employers  and  workpeople,  to  have  as 
its  object  the  regular  consideration  of  matters  affecting  the 
progress  and  well-being  of  the  trade  from  the  point  of  view 
of  all  those  engaged  in  it,  so  far  as  this  is  consistent  with  the 
general  interest  of  the  community,  appears  to  us  necessary. 

6.  Many  complicated  problems  have  arisen  during  the  war 
which  have  a  bearing  both  on  employers  and  workpeople,  and 
may  affect  the  relations  between  them.  It  is  clear  that  in- 
dustrial conditions  will  need  careful  handling  if  grave  difficul- 
ties and  strained  relations  are  to  be  avoided  after  the  war  has 
ended.  The  precise  nature  of  the  problems  to  be  faced  naturally 
varies  from  industry  to  industry,  and  even  from  branch  to 
branch  within  the  same  industry.  Their  treatment  consequently 
will  need  an  intimate  knowledge  of  the  facts  and  circumstances 
of  each  trade,  and  such  knowledge  is  to  be  found  only  among 
those  directly  connected  with  the  trade. 

7.  With  a  view  to  providing  means  for  carrying  out  the 
policy  outlined  above,  we  recommend  that  His  Majesty's  Gov- 
ernment should  propose  without  delay  to  the  various  associa- 
tions of  employers  and  employed  the  formation  of  Joint  Stand- 
ing Industrial  Councils  in  the  several  industries,  where  they 
do  not  already  exist,  composed  of  representatives  of  employers 


420  APPENDIX  VII 

and  employed,  regard  being  paid  to  the  various  sections  of  the 
industry  and  the  various  classes  of  labour  engaged. 

8.  The  appointment  of  a  Chairman  or  Chairmen  should, 
we  think,  be  left  to  the  Council  who  may  decide  that  these 
should  be — 

(i)  A  Chairman  for  each  side  of  the  Council; 

(2)  A  Chairman  and  Vice-Chairman  selected  from  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Council   (one  from  each  side  of  the  Council)  ; 

(3)  A  Chairman  chosen  by  the  Council  from  independent 
persons  outside  the  industry;  or 

(4)  A  Chairman  nominated  by  such  person  or  authority  as 
the  Council  may  determine  or,  failing  agreement,  by  the  Gov- 
ernment. 

9.  The  Council  should  meet  at  regular  and  frequent  intervals, 

10.  The  objects  to  which  the  consideration  of  the  Councils 
should  be  directed  should  be  appropriate  matters  affecting  the 
several  industries  and  particularly  the  establishment  of  a  closer 
co-operation  between  employers  and  employed.  Questions  con- 
nected with  demobilisation  will  call  for  early  attention. 

11.  One  of  the  ghief  factors  in  the  problem,  as  it  at  first 
presents  itself,  consists  of  the  guarantees  given  by  the  Govern- 
ment, with  Parliamentary  sanction,  and  the  various  undertak- 
ings entered  into  by  employers,  to  restore  the  Trade  Union 
rules  and  customs  suspended  during  the  war.  While  this  does 
not  mean  that  all  the  lessons  learnt  during  the  war  should  be 
ignored,  it  does  mean  that  the  definite  co-operation  and  acquies- 
cence by  both  employers  and  employed  must  be  a  condition  of 
any  setting  aside  of  these  guarantees  or  undertakings,  and  that, 
if  new  arrangements  are  to  be  reached,  in  themselves  more 
satisfactory  to  all  parties  but  not  in  strict  accordance  with  the 
guarantees,  they  must  be  the  joint  work  of  employers  and 
employed. 

12.  The  matters  to  be  considered  by  the  Councils  must 
inevitably  differ  widely  from  industry  to  industry,  as  different 
circumstances  and  conditions  call  for  different  treatment,  but 
we  are  of  opinion  that  the  suggestions  set  forth  below  ought 
to  be  taken  into  account,  subject  to  such  modification  in  each 
case  as  may  serve  to  adapt  them  to  the  needs  of  the  various 
industries. 

13.  In  the  well-organised  industries,  one  of  the  first  ques- 
tions to  be  considered  should  be  the  establishment  of  local  and 
works  organisations  to  supplement  and  make  more  effective  the 


APPENDIX  VII  421 

work  of  the  central  bodies.  It  is  not  enough  to  secure  co-opera- 
tion at  the  centre  between  the  national  organisations;  it  is 
equally  necessary  to  enlist  the  activity  and  support  of  employers 
and  employed  in  the  districts  and  in  individual  establishments. 
The  National  Industrial  Council  should  not  be  regarded  as 
complete  in  itself;  what  is  needed  is  a  triple  organisation — in 
the  workshops,  the  districts,  and  nationally.  Moreover,  it  is 
essential  that  the  organisation  at  each  of  these  three  stages 
should  proceed  on  a  common  principle,  and  that  the  greatest 
measure  of  common  action  between  them  should  be  secured. 

14.  With  this  end  in  view,  we  are  of  opinion  that  the  fol- 
lowing proposals  should  be  laid  before  the  National  Industrial 
Councils : — 

(a)  That  District  Councils,  representative  of  the  Trade 
Unions  and  of  the  Employers'  Association  in  the  industry, 
should  be  created,  or  developed  out  of  the  existing  machinery 
for  negotiation  in  the  various  trades. 

(b)  That  Works  Committees,  representative  of  the  man- 
agement and  of  the  workers  employed,  should  be  instituted 
in  particular  works  to  act  in  close  co-operation  with  the 
district  and  national  machinery. 

As  it  is  of  the  highest  importance  that  the  scheme  making 
provision  for  these  Committees  should  be  such  as  to  secure  the 
support  of  the  Trade  Unions  and  Employers'  Associations  con- 
cerned, its  design  should  be  a  matter  for  agreement  between 
these  organisations. 

Just  as  regular  meetings  and  continuity  of  co-operation  are 
essential  in  the  case  of  the  National  Industrial  Councils,  so 
they  seem  to  be  necessary  in  the  case  of  the  district  and  works 
organisations.  The  object  is  to  secure  co-operation  by  grant- 
ing to  workpeople  a  greater  share  in  the  consideration  of  mat- 
ters affecting  their  industry,  and  this  can  only  be  achieved  by 
keeping  employers  and  workpeople  in  constant  touch. 

15.  The  respective  functions  of  Works  Committees,  District 
Councils,  and  National  Councils  will  no  doubt  require  to  be 
determined  separately  in  accordance  with  the  varying  conditions 
of  different  industries.  Care  will  need  to  be  taken  in  each 
case  to  delimit  accurately  their  respective  functions,  in  order 
to  avoid  overlapping  and  resulting  friction.  For  instance, 
where  conditions  of  employment  are  determined  by  national 
agreements,  the  District  Councils  or  Works  Committees  should 
not  be  allowed  to  contract  out  of  conditions  so  laid  down,  nor, 


422  APPENDIX  VII 

where  conditions  are  determined  by  local  agreements,  should 
such  power  be  allowed  to  Works  Committees. 

i6.  Among  the  questions  with  which  it  is  suggested  that  the 
National  Councils  should  deal  or  allocate  to  District  Councils 
or  Works  Committees  the  following  may  be  selected  for  special 
mention : — 

(i)  The  better  utilisation  of  the  practical  knowledge  and 
experience  of  the  workpeople. 

(ii)  Means  for  securing  to  the  workpeople  a  greater  share 
in  and  responsibility  for  the  determination  and  observance 
of  the  conditions  under  which  their  work  is  carried  on. 

(iii)  The  settlement  of  the  general  principles  governing 
the  conditions  of  employment,  including  the  methods  of  fixing, 
paying,  and  readjusting  wages,  having  regard  to  the  need 
for  securing  to  the  workpeople  a  share  in  the  increased 
prosperity  of  the  industry. 

(iv)  The  establishment  of  regular  methods  of  negotiation 
for  issues  arising  between  employers  and  workpeople,  with  a 
view  both  to  the  prevention  of  differences,  and  to  their  bet- 
ter adjustment  when  they  appear. 

(v)  Means  of  ensuring  to  the  workpeople  the  greatest 
possible  security  of  earnings  and  employment,  without  undue 
restriction  upon  change  of  occupation  or  employer. 

(vi)  Methods  of  fixing  and  adjusting  earnings,  piece- 
work prices,  &c.,  and  of  dealing  with  the  many  difficulties 
which  arise  with  regard  to  the  method  and  amount  of  pay- 
ment apart  from  the  fixing  of  general  standard  rates,  which 
are  already  covered  by  paragraph   (iii). 

(vii)  Technical  education  and  training. 

(viii)  Industrial  research  and  the  full  utilisation  of  its  re- 
sults. 

(ix)  The  provision  of  facilities  for  the  full  consideration 
and  utilisation  of  inventions  and  improvement  designed  by 
workpeople,  and  for  the  adequate  safeguarding  of  the  rights 
of  the  designers  of  such  improvements. 

(x)  Improvments  of  processes,  machinery  and  organisation 
and  appropriate  questions  relating  to  management  and  the 
examination  of  industrial  experiments,  with  special  refer- 
ence to  co-operation  in  carrying  new  ideas  into  efifect  and  full 
consideration  of  the  workpeople's  point  of  view  in  relation  to 
them. 

(xi)     Proposed  legislation  affecting  the  industry. 


APPENDIX  VII  423 

17.  The  methods  by  which  the  functions  of  the  proposed 
Councils  should  be  correlated  to  those  of  joint  bodies  in  the 
different  districts,  and  in  the  various  works  within  the  districts, 
must  necessarily  vary  according  to  the  trade.  It  may,  therefore, 
be  the  best  policy  to  leave  it  to  the  trades  themselves  to  form- 
ulate schemes  suitable  to  their  special  circumstances,  it  being 
understood  that  it  is  essential  to  secure  in  each  industry  the 
fullest  measure  of  co-operation  between  employers  and  em- 
ployed, both  generally,  through  the  National  Councils,  and  spe- 
cifically, through  district  Committees  and  workshop  Committees. 

18.  It  would  seem  advisable  that  the  Government  should 
put  the  proposals  relating  to  National  Industrial  Councils  be- 
fore the  employers'  and  workpeoples'  associations  and  request 
them  to  adopt  such  measures  as  are  needful  for  their  establish- 
ment where  they  do  not  already  exist.  Suitable  steps  should 
also  be  taken,  at  the  proper  time,  to  put  the  matter  before 
the  general  public. 

19.  In  forwarding  the  proposals  to  the  parties  concerned, 
we  think  the  Government  should  offer  to  be  represented  in  an 
advisory  capacity  at  the  preliminary  meetings  of  a  Council,  if 
the  parties  so  desire.  We  are  also  of  opinion  that  the  Govern- 
ment should  undertake  to  supply  to  the  various  Councils  such 
information  on  industrial  subjects  as  may  be  available  and 
likely  to  prove  of  value. 

20.  It  has  been  suggested  that  means  must  be  devised 
to  safeguard  the  interests  of  the  community  against  possible 
action  of  an  anti-social  character  on  the  part  of  the  Councils. 
We  have,  however,  here  assumed  that  the  Councils,  in  their 
work  of  promoting  the  interests  of  their  own  industries,  will 
have  regard  for  the  National  interest.  If  they  fulfil  their  func- 
tions they  will  be  the  best  builders  of  national  prosperity.  The 
State  never  parts  with  its  inherent  over-riding  power,  but 
such  power  may  be  least  needed  when  least  obtruded. 

21.  It  appears  to  us  that  it  may  be  desirable  at  some  later 
stage  for  the  State  to  give  the  sanction  of  law  to  agreements 
made  by  the  Councils,  but  the  initiative  in  this  direction  should 
come  from  the  Councils  themselves. 

22.  The  plans  sketched  in  the  foregoing  paragraphs  are 
applicable  in  the  form  in  which  they  are  given  only  to  industries 
in  which  there  are  responsible  associations  of  employers  and 
workpeople  which  can  claim  to  be  fairly  representative.  The 
case  of  the  less  well-organised  trades  or  sections  of  a  trade 


424  APPENDIX  VII 

necessarily  needs  further  consideration.  We  hope  to  be  in  a 
position  shortly  to  put  forward  recommendations  that  will  pre- 
pare the  way  for  the  active  utilisation  in  these  trades  of  the 
same  practical  co-operation  as  is  foreshadowed  in  the  proposals 
made  above  for  the  more  highly-organised  trades. 

23.  It  may  be  desirable  to  state  here  our  considered  opinion 
that  an  essential  condition  of  securing  a  permanent  improvement 
in  the  relations  between  employers  and  employed  is  that  there 
should  be  adequate  organisation  on  the  part  of  both  employers 
and  workpeople.  The  proposals  outlined  for  joint  co-operation 
throughout  the  several  industries  depend  for  their  ultimate  suc- 
cess upon  there  being  such  organisation  on  both  sides ;  and  such 
organisation  is  necessary  also  to  provide  means  whereby  the 
arrangements  and  agreements  made  for  the  industry  may  be 
effectively  carried  out. 

24.  We  have  thought  it  well  to  refrain  from  making  sug- 
gestions or  offering  opinions  with  regard  to  such  matters  as 
profit-sharing,  co-partnership,  or  particular  systems  of  wages, 
&c.  It  would  be  impracticable  for  us  to  make  any  useful 
general  recommendations  on  such  matters,  having  regard  to  the 
varying  conditions  in  different  trades.  We  are  convinced, 
moreover,  that  a  permanent  improvement  in  the  relations  be- 
tween employers  and  employed  must  be  founded  upon  some- 
thing other  than  a  cash  basis.  What  is  wanted  is  that  the 
workpeople  should  have  a  greater  opportunity  of  participating 
in  the  discussion  about  and  adjustment  of  those  parts  of  in- 
dustry by  which  they  are  most  affected. 

25.  The  schemes  recommended  in  this  Report  are  intended 
not  merely  for  the  treatment  of  industrial  problems  when  they 
have  become  acute,  but  also,  and  more  especially,  to  prevent 
their  becoming  acute.  We  believe  that  regular  meetings  to 
discuss  industrial  questions,  apart  from  and  prior  to  any  differ- 
ences with  regard  to  them  that  may  have  begun  to  cause  friction, 
will  materially  reduce  the  number  of  occasions  on  which,  in 
the  view  of  either  employers  or  employed,  it  is  necessary  to 
contemplate  recourse  to  a  stoppage  of  work. 

26.  We  venture  to  hope  that  representative  men  in  each 
industry,  with  pride  in  their  calling  and  care  for  its  place  as 
a  contributor  to  the  national  well-being,  will  come  together  in 
the  manner  here  suggested,  and  apply  themselves  to  promoting 
industrial  harmony  and  efficiency  and  removing  the  obstacles 
that  have  hitherto  stood  in  the  way. 


APPENDIX  VII  425 

J.  H.  Whitley,  Chairman,  F.  S.  Button,  Geo.  J.  Carter,  S.  J. 
Chapman,  G.  H.  Claughton,  J.  R.  Clynes,  J.  A.  Hobson,  A.  Susan 
JIawrence,  J.  J.  Mallon,  Thos.  R.  Ratcliffe-Ellis,  Robt.  Smillie, 
Allan  M.  Smith,  Mona  Wilson. 

H.  J.  Wilson,  Arthur  Greenwood,  Secretaries. 

8th  March,  1917. 

The  following  questions  were  addressed  by  the  Reconstruction 
Committee  to  the  Sub-Committee  on  the  Relations  between  Em- 
ployers and  Employed  in  order  to  make  clear  certain  points  which 
appeared  to  call  for  further  elucidation.  The  answers  given  are 
subjoined. 

Q.  I.  In  what  classes  of  Industries  does  the  Interim  Report  pro- 
pose that  Industrial  Councils  shall  be  established?  What  basis  of 
classification  has  the  Sub-Committee  in  viewf 

A.  I.  It  has  been  suggested  that,  for  the  purpose  of  con- 
sidering the  establishment  of  Industrial  Councils,  or  other 
bodies  designed  to  assist  in  the  improvement  of  relations  be- 
tween employers  and  employed,  the  various  industries  should 
be  grouped  into  three  classes — (a)  industries  in  which  organ- 
isation on  the  part  of  employers  and  employed  is  sufficiently 
developed  to  render  the  Councils  representative;  (6)  industries 
in  which  either  as  regards  employers  and  employed,  or  both, 
the  degree  of  organisation,  though  considerable,  is  less  marked 
than  in  (a)  and  is  sufficient  to  be  regarded  as  representa- 
tive; and  (c)  industries  in  which  organisation  is  so  imperfect, 
either  as  regards  employers  or  employed,  or  both,  that  no 
Associations  can  be  said  adequately  to  represent  those  engaged 
in  the  trade. 

It  will  be  clear  that  an  analysis  of  industries  will  show  a 
number  which  are  on  the  border  lines  between  these  groups 
and  special  consideration  will  have  to  be  given  to  such  trades. 
So  far  as  groups  (a)  and  (c)  are  concerned,  a  fairly  large 
number  of  trades  can  readily  be  assigned  to  them;  group  {b) 
is  necessarily  more  indeterminate. 

For  trades  in  group  (a)  the  Committee  have  proposed  the 
establishment  of  Joint  Standing  Industrial  Councils  in  the  sev- 
eral trades.  In  dealing  with  the  various  industries  it  may  be 
necessary  to  consider  specially  the  case  of  parts  of  industries  in 
group  (a)  where  organisation  is  not  fully  developed. 

Q.  2.  Is  the  machinery  proposed  intended  to  be  in  addition  to  or 
in  substitution  for  existing  machinery?  Is  it  proposed  that  exist- 
ing machinery  should  be  superseded?  By  "existing  machinery"  is 
meant  Conciliation  Boards  and  all  other  organisations  for  joint 
conference  and  discussion  between  Employers  and  Employed. 


426  APPENDIX  VII 

A.  2.  In  most  organised  trades  there  already  exist  joint 
bodies  for  particular  purposes.  It  is  not  proposed  that  the 
Industrial  Councils  should  necessarily  disturb  these  existing 
bodies.  A  council  would  be  free,  if  it  chose  and  if  the  bodies 
concerned  approved,  to  merge  existing  Committees,  &c.,  in  the 
Council  or  to  link  them  with  the  Council  as  Sub-Committees. 

Q.  3.  Is  it  understood  that  membership  of  the  Councils  is  to  be 
confined  to  representatives  elected  by  Employers'  Associations  and 
Trade  Unionsf  What  is  the  view  of  the  Sub-Committee  regarding 
the  entry  of  new  organisations  established  after  the  Councils  have 
been  set  up? 

A.  3.  It  is  intended  that  the  Councils  should  be  composed 
only  of  representatives  of  Trade  Unions  and  Employers'  Asso- 
ciations, and  that  new  organisations  should  be  admitted  only 
with  the  approval  of  the  particular  side  of  the  Council  of  which, 
the  organisation  would  form  a  part. 

Q.  4.  (a) — Is  it  intended  that  decisions  reached  by  the  Councils 
shall  be  binding  upon  the  bodies  comprising  them?  If  so,  is  such 
binding  effect  to  be  conditional  upon  the  consent  of  each  Employers' 
Association  or  Trade  Union  affected? 

A.  4.  (a)  It  is  contemplated  that  agreements  reached  by 
Industrial  Councils  should  (whilst  not  of  course  possessing  the 
binding  force  of  law)  carry  with  them  the  same  obligation  of 
observance  as  exists  in  the  case  of  other  agreements  between 
Employers'  Associations  and  Trade  Unions.  A  Council,  being 
on  its  workmen's  side  based  on  the  Trade  Unions  concerned  in 
the  industry,  its  powers  or  authority  could  only  be  such  as  the 
constituent  Trade  Unions  freely  agreed  to. 

Q.  4.  (b)  In  particular,  is  it  intended  that  all  pledges  given  either 
by  the  Government  or  employers  for  the  restoration  of  Trade  Union 
rules  and  practices  after  the  war  shall  be  redeemed  without  quali- 
fication unless  the  particular  Trade  Union  concerned  agrees  to 
alteration;  or,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  Industrial  Council  shall  have 
power  to  decide  such  question  by  a  majority  vote  of  the  workmen's 
representatives  from  all  the  Trade  Unions  in  the  industry? 

A.  4.  (&)  It  is  clearly  intended  that  all  pledges  relating 
to  the  restoration  of  Trade  Union  rules  shall  be  redeemed  with- 
out qualification  unless  the  particular  Trade  Union  concerned 
agrees  to  alteration ;  and  it  is  not  intended  that  the  Council 
shall  have  power  to  decide  such  questions  by  a  majority  vote 
of  the  workmen's  representatives  from  all  the  Trade  Unions 
in  the  industry. 


APPENDIX  VIII 

SECOND  REPORT  ON  JOINT  STANDING  INDUSTRIAL 
COUNCILS 

COMMITTEE   ON    RELATIONS    BETWEEN    EMPLOYERS    AND    EMPLOYED; 
MINISTRY    OF    RECONSTRUCTION 

To   the   Right   Honourable    D.   Lloyd   George,   M.    P.,   Prime 
Minister. 

Sir,  Following  the  proposals  made  in  our  first  Report,  we 
have  now  the  honour  to  present  further  recommendations 
dealing  with  industries  in  which  organisation  on  the  part  of 
employers  and  employed  is  less  completely  established  than  in 
the  industries  covered  by  the  previous  Report,  and  with  in- 
dustries in  which  such  organisation  is  weak  or  non-existent. 

2.  Before  commencing  the  examination  of  these  industries 
the  Committee  came  to  the  conclusion  that  it  would  materially 
assist  their  enquiries  if  they  could  have  the  direct  advantage 
of  the  knowledge  and  experience  of  some  representative  em- 
ployers who  were  connected  with  industries  of  the  kind  with 
which  the  Committee  were  about  to  deal;  and  it  was  arranged, 
with  your  approval,  that  Sir  Maurice  Levy,  Mr.  F.  N.  Hep- 
worth,  Mr.  W.  Hill,  and  Mr.  D.  R.  H.  Williams  should  be 
appointed  to  act  with  the  Committee  while  these  industries  were 
under  consideration.  This  arrangement  made  it  possible  to 
release  from  attendance  at  the  earlier  meetings  of  the  Com- 
mittee Sir  Gilbert  Claughton,  Sir  T.  Ratcliffe-Ellis,  Sir 
George  J.  Carter,  and  Mr.  Allan  Smith,  whose  time  is  greatly 
occupied  in  other  public  work  and  whose  experience  is  more 
particularly  related  to  the  organised  trades  covered  by  our 
former  Report. 

3.  It  is  difficult  to  classify  industries  according  to  the  degree 
of  organisation  among  employers  and  employed,  but  for  con- 
venience of  consideration  the  industries  of  the  country  may  be 
divided  into  three  groups: — 

427 


428  APPENDIX  VIII 

Group  A. — Consisting  of  industries  in  which  organisation 
on  the  part  of  employers  and  employed  is  sufficiently  de- 
veloped to  render  their  respective  associations  representative 
of  the  great  majority  of  those  engaged  in  the  industry. 
These  are  the  industries  which  we  had  in  mind  in  our  first 
Interim  Report. 

Group  B. — Comprising  those  industries  in  which,  either  as 
regards  employers  and  employed,  or  both,  the  degree  of 
organisation,  though  considerable,  is  less  marked  than  in 
Group  A. 

Group  C. — Consisting  of  industries  in  which  organisation  is 
so  imperfect,  either  as  regards  employers  or  employed,  or 
both,  that  no  associations  can  be  said  adequately  to  repre- 
sent those  engaged  in  the  industry. 

The  present  Report  is  concerned  with  Groups  B.  and  C, 

4.  So  far  as  Groups  A.  and  C.  are  concerned,  a  number 
of  industries  can  be  definitely  assigned  to  them.  Group  B., 
however,  is  necessarily  more  indeterminate.  Some  of  the  in- 
dustries in  this  group  approach  closely  to  industries  in  Group 
A,  while  others  verge  upon  Group  C.  Further,  most  industries, 
in  whatever  class  they  may  fall,  possess  a  "tail,"  consisting  of 
badly  organised  areas,  or  sections  of  the  industry.  These  facts 
we  have  borne  in  mind  in  formulating  our  further  proposals. 

5.  So  far  as  industries  in  Group  B.  are  concerned,  we  are 
of  opinion  that  the  proposals  of  our  First  Report  should,  in 
their  main  lines,  be  applied  to  those  which,  on  examination 
by  the  Ministry  of  Labour  in  consultation  with  the  Associations 
concerned,  are  found  to  be  relatively  well  organised.  We  sug- 
gest, however,  that  where  in  these  industries  a  National  In- 
dustrial Council  is  formed  there  should  be  appointed  one  or  at 
most  two  official  representatives  to  assist  in  the  initiation  of 
the  Council,  and  continue  after  its  establishment  to  act  in  an 
advisory  capacity  and  serve  as  a  link  with  the  Government.  We 
do  not  contemplate  that  a  representative  so  appointed  should 
be  a  member  of  the  National  Industrial  Council,  in  the  sense 
that  he  should  have  power,  by  a  vote,  to  influence  the  decisions 
of  the  Council,  but  that  he  should  attend  its  meetings  and  assist 
in  any  way  which  may  be  found  acceptable  to  it.  By  so  doing 
he  would  acquire  a  continuous  knowledge  of  the  conditions  of 
the  industry  of  which  the  Government  could  avail  itself,  and  so 
avoid  many  mistakes  that  under  present  conditions  are  inevit- 
able. 


APPENDIX  VIII  429 

The  question  of  the  retention  of  the  official  representatives 
should  be  considered  by  the  Councils  in  the  light  of  experience 
gained  when  an  adequate  time  has  elapsed.  We  anticipate  that 
in  many  cases  their  continued  assistance  will  be  found  of  value 
even  after  an  industry  has  attained  a  high  degree  of  organisa- 
tion, but  in  no  case  should  they  remain  except  at  the  express 
wish  of  the  Councils  concerned. 

6.  It  may  be  that  in  some  Group  B.  industries  in  which  a 
National  Industrial  Council  is  formed  certain  areas  are  well 
suited  to  the  establishment  of  District  Councils,  while  in  other 
areas  the  organisation  of  employers  or  employed,  or  both,  is 
too  weak  to  be  deemed  representative.  There  appears  to  be  no 
good  reason  why  in  the  former  areas  there  should  not  be 
District  Industrial  Councils,  acting  in  conjunction  with  the 
National  Industrial  Councils,  in  accordance  with  the  principles 
formulated  in  the  Committee's  earlier  report  on  the  well- 
organised  trades. 

7.  An  examination  of  some  of  the  industries  coming  within 
Group  B.  may  show  that  there  are  some  which,  owing  to  the 
peculiarities  of  the  trades  and  their  geographical  distribution, 
cannot  at  present  be  brought  readily  within  the  scope  of  the 
proposals  for  a  National  Industrial  Council,  though  they  may 
be  quite  well  organised  in  two  or  more  separate  districts.  In 
such  a  case  we  think  there  might  well  be  formed  one  or  more 
District  Industrial  Councils.  We  anticipate  that  in  course  of 
time  the  influence  of  the  District  Councils  would  be  such  that 
the  industry  would  become  suitable  for  the  establishment  of 
a  National  Industrial  Council. 

8.  In  the  case  of  industries  in  Group  B.  (as  in  the  industries 
covered  by  our  first  Report),  we  consider  that  the  members  of 
the  National  Councils  and  of  the  District  Councils  should  be 
representatives  of  the  Employers'  Associations  and  Trade 
Unions  concerned.  In  the  formation  of  the  Councils,  regard 
should  be  paid  to  the  various  sections  of  the  industry  and 
the  various  classes  of  labour  engaged,  and  the  representatives 
should  include  representatives  of  women's  organisations.  In 
view  of  the  extent  to  which  women  are  employed  in  these  in- 
dustries, we  think  the  Trade  Unions,  when  selecting  their  rep- 
resentatives for  the  Councils,  should  include  a  number  of 
women  among  those  who  are  appointed  to  be  members. 

9.  It  does  not  appear  to  us  necessary  or  desirable  to  sug- 
gest any  fixed  standard  of  organisation  which  should  exist  in 


430  APPENDIX  VIII 

any  industry  before  a  National  Industrial  Council  should  be 
established.  The  case  of  each  industry  will  need  to  be  con- 
sidered separately,  regard  being  paid  to  its  particular  circum- 
stances and  characteristics. 

In  the  discussion  of  this  matter,  we  have  considered  whether 
it  would  be  feasible  to  indicate  a  percentage  of  organisation 
which  should  be  reached  before  a  Council  is  formed,  but,  in 
view  of  the  great  diversity  of  circumstances  in  these  industries 
and  of  the  differing  degrees  to  which  the  several  sections  of 
some  of  them  are  organised,  we  have  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  it  is  more  desirable  to  leave  the  matter  to  the  decision 
of  the  Ministry  of  Labour  and  the  organisations  concerned. 
Whatever  theoretical  standard  may  be  contemplated,  we  think 
its  application  should  not  be  restrictive  in  either  direction. 

10.  The  level  of  organisation  in  industries  in  Group  C, 
is  such  as  to  make  the  scheme  we  have  proposed  for  National 
or  District  Industrial  Councils  inapplicable.  To  these  industries 
the  machinery  of  the  Trade  Boards  Act  might  well  be  applied, 
pending  the  development  of  such  degree  of  organisation  as 
would  render  feasible  the  establishment  of  a  National  Council  or 
District  Councils. 

11.  The  Trade  Boards  Act  was  originally  intended  to  secure 
the  establishment  of  a  minimum  standard  of  wages  in  certain 
unorganised  industries,  but  we  consider  that  the  Trade  Boards 
should  be  regarded  also  as  a  means  of  supplying  a  regular 
machinery  for  negotiation  and  decision  on  certain  groups  of 
questions  dealt  with  in  other  circumstances  by  collective  bar- 
gaining between  employers'  organisations  and  trade  unions. 

In  order  that  the  Trade  Boards  Act  may  be  of  greater  utility 
in  connection  with  unorganised  and  badly  organised  industries 
or  sections  of  industries,  we  consider  that  certain  modifications 
are  needed  to  enlarge  the  functions  of  the  Trade  Boards.  We 
suggest  that  they  should  be  empowered  to  deal  not  only  with 
minimum  rates  of  wages  but  with  hours  of  labour  and  questions 
cognate  to  wages  and  hours.  We  are  of  opinion  also  that  the 
functions  of  the  Trade  Boards  should  be  extended  so  as  to 
enable  them  to  initiate  and  conduct  enquiries  on  all  matters  af- 
fecting the  industry  or  the  section  of  the  industry  concerned. 

12.  If  these  proposals  were  adopted,  there  would  be  set  up, 
in  a  number  of  industries  or  sections  of  industries.  Trade 
Boards  (consisting  of  representatives  of  employers  and  em- 
ployed, together  with  "appointed  members")  who  would,  within 


APPENDIX  VIII  431 

the  scope  of  their  functions,  establish  minimum  standard  rates 
and  conditions  applicable  to  the  industry  or  section  of  the  in- 
dustry which  they  represented,  and  consider  systematically  mat- 
ters affecting  the  well-being  of  the  industry. 

13.  Where  an  industry  in  Group  C.  becomes  sufficiently 
organised  to  admit  of  the  institution  of  National  and  District 
Councils,  we  consider  that  these  bodies  should  be  set  up  on 
the  lines  already  indicated.  Where  it  appears  to  a  Trade  Board 
that  an  Industrial  Council  should  be  appointed  in  the  industry 
concerned,  they  should  have  power  (a)  to  make  application  to 
the  Minister  of  Labour  asking  him  to  approach  the  organisa- 
tions of  employers  and  employed,  and  (b)  to  suggest  a  scheme 
by  which  the  representation  of  the  workers'  and  employers' 
sides  of  the  Trade  Board  could  be  secured. 

14.  Whether  in  industries  in  Group  C.  the  establishment 
of  Works  Committees  is  to  be  recommended  is  a  question 
which  calls  for  very  careful  examination,  and  we  have  made 
the  general  question  of  Works  Committees  the  subject  of  a 
separate  Report. 

15.  We  have  already  pointed  out  that  most  of  the  industries 
in  Groups  A.  and  B.  have  sections  or  areas  in  which  the  degree 
of  organisation  among  the  employers  and  employed  falls  much 
below  what  is  normal  in  the  rest  of  the  industry;  and  it 
appears  to  us  desirable  that  the  general  body  of  employers 
and  employed  in  any  industry  should  have  some  means  whereby 
they  may  bring  the  whole  of  the  trade  up  to  the  standard 
of  minimum  conditions  which  have  been  agreed  upon  by  a 
substantial  majority  of  the  industry.  We  therefore  recom- 
mend that,  on  the  application  of  a  National  Industrial  Council 
sufficiently  representative  of  an  industry,  the  Minister  of 
Labour  should  be  empowered,  if  satisfied  that  the  case  is  a 
suitable  one,  to  make  an  Order  either  instituting  for  a  sec- 
tion of  the  industry  a  Trade  Board  on  which  the  National 
Industrial  Council  should  be  represented,  or  constituting  the 
Industrial  Council  a  Trade  Board  under  the  provisions  of 
the  Trade  Boards  Act.  These  proposals  are  not  intended  to 
limit,  but  to  be  in  addition  to,  the  powers  at  present  held  by 
the  Ministry  of  Labour  with  regard  to  the  establishment  of 
Trade  Boards  in  trades  and  industries  where  they  are  con- 
sidered by  the  Ministry  to  be  necessary. 

16.  We  have  already  indicated  (paragraph  9)  that  the  cir- 
cumstances and  characteristics  of  each  of  the  several  industries 


432  APPENDIX  VIII 

will  need  to  be  considered  before  it  can  be  decided  definitely 
how  far  any  of  our  proposals  can  be  applied  in  particular 
instances,  and  we  have  refrained  from  attempting  to  suggest 
any  exact  degree  of  organisation  which  would  be  requisite 
before  a  particular  proposal  could  be  applied.  We  think,  how- 
ever, that  the  suggestion  we  have  made  in  the  preceding  para- 
graph to  confer  upon  a  National  Industrial  Council  the  powers 
of  a  Trade  Board  should  be  adopted  only  in  those  cases  in 
which  the  Minister  of  Labour  is  satisfied  that  the  Council 
represents  a  substantial  majority  of  the  industry  concerned. 

17.  We  are  of  opinion  that  most  of  the  chief  industries  of 
the  country  could  be  brought  under  one  or  other  of  the  schemes 
contained  in  this  and  the  preceding  Report.  There  would  then 
be  broadly  two  classes  of  industries  in  the  country — industries 
with  Industrial  Councils  and  industries  with  Trade  Boards. 

18.  In  the  former  group  the  National  Industrial  Councils 
would  be  constituted  either  in  the  manner  we  have  indicated 
in  our  first  Report,  carrying  with  them  District  Councils  and 
Works  Committees,  or  on  the  lines  suggested  in  the  present 
Report,  i.  e.,  each  Council  coming  within  the  scope  of  this 
Report  having  associated  with  it  one,  or  two,  official  represen- 
tatives to  act  in  an  advisory  capacity  and  as  a  link  with  the 
Government,  in  addition  to  the  representatives  of  the  em- 
ployers and  employed. 

19.  It  should  be  noted  that  in  the  case  of  industries  in 
which  there  is  a  National  Industrial  Council,  Trade  Boards 
might,  in  some  instances,  be  associated  with  the  Council  in 
order  to  determine  wages  and  hours,  &c.  in  certain  sections 
or  areas.  It  is  possible  that  in  some  allied  trades,  really  form- 
ing part  of  the  same  industry,  both  sets  of  proposals  might,  in 
the  first  instance,  be  in  operation  side  by  side,  one  trade  having 
its  Industrial  Council  and  the  other  its  Trade  Board.  Where 
these  circumstances  obtain,  we  anticipate  that  the  Trade  Board 
would  be  a  stepping  stone  to  the  full  Industrial  Council  status. 

20.  It  may  be  useful  to  present  a  brief  outline  of  the  pro- 
posals which  we  have  so  far  put  forward : — 

(o)  In  the  more  highly  organised  industries  (Group  A.)  we 
propose  a  triple  organisation  of  national,  district,  and 
workshop  bodies,  as  outlined  in  our  first  Report. 

(b)  In  industries  where  there  are  representative  associations 
of  employers  and  employed,  which,  however,  do  not 
possess  the  authority  of  those  in  Group  A.  industries, 


APPENDIX  VIII  433 

we  propose  that  the  triple  organisation  should  be  mod- 
ified by  attaching  to  each  National  Industrial  Council 
one  or  at  most  two  representatives  of  the  Ministry  of 
Labour  to  act  in  an  advisory  capacity. 

(c)  In  industries  in  both  Groups  A.  and  B.,  we  propose  that 

unorganised  areas  or  branches  of  an  industry  should 
be  provided,  on  the  application  of  the  National  In- 
dustrial Council  and  with  the  approval  of  the  Ministry 
of  Labour,  with  Trade  Boards  for  such  areas  or 
branches,  the  Trade  Boards  being  linked  with  the  In- 
dustrial Council. 

(d)  In  industries  having  no  adequate  organisation  of  em- 

ployers or  employed,  we  recommend  that  Trade  Boards 
should  be  continued  or  established,  and  that  these 
should,  with  the  approval  of  the  Ministry  of  Labour, 
be  enabled  to  formulate  a  scheme  for  an  Industrial 
Council,  which  might  include  in  an  advisory  capacity 
the   "appointed   members"   of  the  Trade   Board. 

21.  It  will  be  observed  that  the  policy  we  recommend  is 
based  upon  organisation  on  the  part  of  both  employers  and 
employed.  Where  this  is  adequate,  as  in  Group  A.  industries, 
there  is  no  need  of  external  assistance.  In  Group  B.  industries, 
we  think  that  the  organisations  concerned  would  be  glad  to 
have  the  services  of  an  official  representative  who  would  act  as 
adviser  and  as  a  link  with  the  Government.  In  unorganised 
sections  of  both  groups  of  industries  we  believe  that  a  larger 
measure  of  Government  assistance  will  be  both  desirable  and 
acceptable,  and  we  have  therefore  suggested  the  adoption  of 
the  machinery  of  the  Trade  Boards  Act  in  this  connection.  In 
Group  C.  industries  we  think  that  organisation  will  be  en- 
couraged by  the  use  of  the  powers  under  the  Trade  Boards 
Act,  and  where  National  Industrial  Councils  are  set  up  we  rec- 
ommend that  the  "appointed  members"  of  the  Trade  Board 
should  act  on  the  Councils  in  an  advisory  capacity.  Briefly,  our 
proposals  are  that  the  extent  of  State  assistance  should  vary 
inversely  with  the  degree  of  organisation  in  industries. 

22.  We  do  not,  however,  regard  Government  assistance  as 
an  alternative  to  the  organisation  of  employers  and  employed. 
On  the  contrary,  we  regard  it  as  a  means  of  furthering  the 
growth  and  development  of  such  organisation. 

23.  We  think  it  advisable  in  this  connection  to  repeat  the 
following  paragraph   from  our   former  Report: — 


434  APPENDIX  VIII 

"It  may  be  desirable  to  state  here  our  considered  opinion 
that  an  essential  condition  of  securing  a  permanent  improve- 
ment in  the  relations  between  employers  and  employed  is  that 
there  should  be  adequate  organisation  on  the  part  of  both 
employers  and  workpeople.  The  proposals  outlined  for  joint 
co-operation  throughout  the  several  industries  depend  for  their 
ultimate  success  upon  there  being  such  organisation  on  both 
sides;  and  such  organisation  is  necessary  also  to  provide  means 
whereby  the  arrangements  and  agreements  made  for  the  in- 
dustry may  be  effectively  carried  out." 

24.  In  considering  the  scope  of  the  matters  referred  to  us 
we  have  formed  the  opinion  that  the  expression  "employers  and 
workmen"  in  our  reference  covers  State  and  Municipal  au- 
thorities and  persons  employed  by  them.  Accordingly  we 
recommend  that  such  authorities  and  their  workpeople  should 
take  into  consideration  the  proposals  made  in  this  and  in  our 
first  Report,  with  a  view  to  determining  how  far  such  proposals 
can  suitably  be  adopted  in  their  case. 

We  understand  that  the  Ministry  of  Labour  has  up  to  the 
present  circulated  our  first  Report  only  to  employers'  and  work- 
people's associations  in  the  ordinary  private  industries.  We 
think,  however,  that  both  it  and  the  present  Report  should  also 
be  brought  to  the  notice  of  State  Departments  and  Municipal 
Authorities  employing  Labour. 

25.  The  proposals  we  have  set  forth  above  do  not  require 
legislation   except   on   three   points,   namely,   to   provide — 

(i)  That  the  Trade  Boards  shall  have  power,  in  addition  to 
determining  minimum  rates  of  wages,  to  deal  with  hours  of 
labour  and  questions  cognate  to  wages  and  hours. 

(2)  That  the  Trade  Boards  shall  have  power  to  initiate  en- 
quiries, and  make  proposals  to  the  Government  Departments 
concerned,  on  matters  affecting  the  industrial  conditions  of  the 
trade,  as  well  as  on  questions  of  general  interest  to  the  in- 
dustries concerned  respectively. 

(3)  That  when  an  Industrial  Council  sufficiently  representa- 
tive of  an  industry  makes  application,  the  Minister  of  Labour 
shall  have  power,  if  satisfied  that  the  case  is  a  suitable  one,  to 
make  an  Order  instituting  for  a  section  of  the  industry  a  Trade 
Board  on  which  the  Industrial  Council  shall  be  represented,  or 
constituting  the  Council  a  Trade  Board  under  the  Trade 
Boards  Acts. 

26.  The  proposals  which  we  have  made  must  necessarily  be 


APPENDIX  VIII  43S 

adapted  to  meet  the  varying  needs  and  circumstances  of  dif- 
ferent industries,  and  it  is  not  anticipated  that  there  will  be 
uniformity  in  practice.  Our  recommendations  are  intended 
merely  to  set  forth  the  main  lines  of  development  which  we  be- 
lieve to  be  essential  to  ensure  better  relations  between  em- 
ployers and  employed.  Their  application  to  the  several  in- 
dustries we  can  safely  leave  to  those  intimately  concerned,  with 
the  conviction  that  the  flexibility  and  adaptability  of  industrial 
organisation  which  have  been  so  large  a  factor  in  enabling  in- 
dustry to  stand  the  enormous  strain  of  the  war  will  not  fail  the 
country  when  peace  returns. 

27.  Other  problems  affecting  the  relations  between  employers 
and  employed  are  engaging  our  attention,  but  we  believe  that, 
whatever  further  steps  may  be  necessary  to  accomplish  the  ob- 
ject we  have  in  view,  the  lines  of  development  suggested  in 
the  present  Report  and  the  one  which  preceded  it  are  funda- 
mental. We  believe  that  in  each  industry  there  is  a  sufficiently 
large  body  of  opinion  willing  to  adopt  the  proposals  we  have 
made  as  a  means  of  establishing  a  new  relation  in  industry. 

J.  H.  Whitley,  Chairman,  F.  S.  Button,  S.  J.  Chapman, 
G.  H.  Claughton,  J.  R.  Clynes,  F.  N.  Hepworth,  Wilfrid 
Hill,  J.  A.  Hobson,  A.  Susan  Lawrence,  Maurice  Levy, 
J.  J.  Mallon,  Thos.  R.  Ratcliffe-Ellis,  Allan  M.  Smith, 
D.  R.  H.  Williams,  Mona  Wilson.  * 

H.  J.  Wilson,  A.  Greenwood,  Secretaries. 

i8th  October,  1917. 

*  Sir  G.  J.  Carter  and  Mr.  Smillie  were  unable  to  attend  any  of 
the  meetings  at  which  this  Report  was  considered  and  they  therefore 
do  not  sign  it. 


APPENDIX  IX 
SUPPLEMENTARY  REPORT  ON  WORKS  COMMITTEES 

COMMITTEE    ON    RELATIONS    BETWEEN    EMPLOYERS    AND    EMPLOYED; 
MINISTRY   OF  RECONSTRUCTION 

To   the   Right   Honourable   D.   Lloyd   George,   M.    P.,   Prime 

Minister. 

SiR^  In  our  first  and  second  Reports  we  have  referred  to  the 
establishment  of  Works  Committees,^  representative  of  the 
management  and  of  the  workpeople,  and  appointed  from  within 
the  works,  as  an  essential  part  of  the  scheme  of  organisation 
suggested  to  secure  improved  relations  between  employers  and 
employed.  The  purpose  of  the  present  Report  is  to  deal  more 
fully  with  the  proposal  to  institute  such  Committees. 

2.  Better  relations  between  employers  and  their  workpeople 
can  best  be  arrived  at  by  granting  to  the  latter  a  greater  share  in 
the  consideration  of  matters  with  which  they  are  concerned. 
In  every  industry  there  are  certain  questions,  such  as  rates  of 
wages  and  hours  of  work,  which  should  be  settled  by  District 
or  National  agreement,  and  with  any  matter  so  settled  no 
Works  Committee  should  be  allowed  to  interfere ;  but  there  are 
also  many  questions  closely  affecting  daily  life  and  comfort  in, 
and  the  success  of,  the  business,  and  affecting  in  no  small  degree 
efficiency  of  working,  which  are  peculiar  to  the  individual  work- 
shop or  factory.  The  purpose  of  a  Works  Committee  is  to 
establish  and  maintain  a  system  of  co-operation  in  all  these 
workshop  matters. 

3.  We  have  throughout  our  recommendations  proceeded 
upon  the  assumption  that  the  greatest  success  is  likely  to  be 

*  In  the  use  of  the  term  "Works  Committees"  in  this  Report 
it  is  not  intended  to  use  the  word  "works"  in  a  technical  sense;  in 
such  an  industry  as  the  Coal  Trade,  for  example,  the  term  "Pit 
Committees"  would  probably  be  the  term  used  in  adopting  the 
scheme. 

436 


APPENDIX  IX  437 

achieved  by  leaving  to  the  representative  bodies  of  employers 
and  employed  in  each  industry  the  maximum  degree  of  free- 
dom to  settle  for  themselves  the  precise  form  of  Council  or 
Committee  which  should  be  adopted,  having  regard  in  each  case 
to  the  particular  circumstances  of  the  trade ;  and,  in  accordance 
with  this  principle,  we  refrain  from  indicating  any  definite  form 
of  constitution  for  the  Works  Committees.  Our  proposals  as 
a  whole  assume  the  existence  of  organisations  of  both  em- 
ployers and  employed  and  a  frank  and  full  recognition  of  such 
organisations.  Works  Committees  established  otherwise  than 
in  accordance  with  these  principles  could  not  be  regarded 
as  a  part  of  the  scheme  we  have  recommended,  and  might  indeed 
be  a  hindrance  to  the  development  of  the  new  relations  in  in- 
dustry to  which  we  look  forward.  We  think  the  aim  should  be 
the  complete  and  coherent  organisation  of  the  trade  on  both 
sides,  and  Works  Committees  will  be  of  value  in  so  far  as 
they  contribute  to  such  a  result. 

4.  We  are  of  opinion  that  the  complete  success  of  Works 
Committees  necessarily  depends  largely  upon  the  degree  and 
efficiency  of  organisation  in  the  trade,  and  upon  the  extent  to 
which  the  Committees  can  be  linked  up,  through  organisations 
that  we  have  in  mind,  with  the  remainder  of  the  scheme  which 
we  are  proposing,  viz.,  the  District  and  National  Councils.  We 
think  it  important  to  state  that  the  success  of  the  Works  Com- 
mittees would  be  very  seriously  interfered  with  if  the  idea 
existed  that  such  Committees  were  used,  or  likely  to  be  used, 
by  employers  in  opposition  to  Trade  Unionism.  It  is  strongly 
felt  that  the  setting  up  of  Works  Committees  without  the  co- 
operation of  the  Trade  Unions  and  the  Employers'  Associations 
in  the  trade  or  branch  of  trade  concerned  would  stand  in  the 
way  of  the  improved  industrial  relationships  which  in  these 
Reports  we  are  endeavouring  to  further. 

5.  In  an  industry  where  the  workpeople  are  unorganised, 
or  only  very  partially  organised,  there  is  a  danger  that  Works 
Committees  may  be  used,  or  thought  to  be  used,  in  opposition 
to  Trade  Unionism.  It  is  important  that  such  fears  should  be 
guarded  against  in  the  initiation  of  any  scheme.  We  look  upon 
successful  Works  Committees  as  the  broad  base  of  the  Industrial 
Structure  which  we  have  recommended,  and  as  the  means  of 
enlisting  the  interest  of  the  workers  in  the  success  both  of  the 
industry  to  which  they  are  attached  and  of  the  workshop  or 
factory  where  so   much  of  their  life  is  spent.    These   Com- 


438  APPENDIX  IX 

mittees  should  not,  in  constitution  or  methods  of  working,  dis- 
courage Trade  organisations. 

6.  Works  Committees,  in  our  opinion,  should  have  regular 
meetings  at  fixed  times,  and,  as  a  general  rule,  not  less  fre- 
quently than  once  a  fortnight.  They  should  always  keep  in 
the  forefront  the  idea  of  constructive  co-operation  in  the  im- 
provement of  the  industry  to  which  they  belong.  Suggestions 
of  all  kinds  tending  to  improvement  should  be  frankly  welcomed 
and  freely  discussed.  Practical  proposals  should  be  examined 
from  all  points  of  view.  There  is  an  undeveloped  asset  of 
constructive  ability — valuable  alike  to  the  industry  and  to  the 
State — awaiting  the  means  of  realisation;  problems,  old  and 
new,  will  find  their  solution  in  a  frank  partnership  of  knowledge, 
experience  and  goodwill.  Works  Committees  would  fail  in 
their  main  purpose  if  they  existed  only  to  smooth  over  griev- 
ances. 

7.  We  recognise  that,  from  time  to  time,  matters  will  arise 
which  the  management  or  the  workmen  consider  to  be  questions 
they  cannot  discuss  in  these  joint  meetings.  When  this  occurs, 
we  anticipate  that  nothing  but  good  will  come  from  the  friendly 
statement  of  the  reasons  why  the  reservation  is  made. 

8.  We  regard  the  successful  development  and  utilisation  of 
Works  Committees  in  any  business  on  the  basis  recommended 
in  this  Report  as  of  equal  importance  with  its  commercial  and 
scientific  efficiency;  and  we  think  that  in  every  case  one  of 
the  partners  or  directors,  or  some  other  responsible  representa- 
tive of  the  management,  would  be  well  advised  to  devote  a 
substantial  part  of  his  time  and  thought  to  the  good  working 
and  development  of  such  a  committee. 

9.  There  has  been  some  experience,  both  before  the  war  and 
during  the  war,  of  the  benefits  of  Works  Committees,  and  we 
think  it  should  be  recommended  most  strongly  to  employers 
and  employed  that,  in  connection  with  the  scheme  for  the 
establishment  of  National  and  District  Industrial  Councils, 
they  should  examine  this  experience  with  a  view  to  the  insti- 
tution of  Works  Committees  on  proper  lines,  in  works  where 
the  conditions  render  their  formation  practicable.  We  have 
recommended  that  the  Ministry  of  Labour  should  prepare  a 
summary  of  the  experience  available  with  reference  to  Works 
Committees,  both  before  and  during  the  war,  including  informa- 
tion as  to  any  rules  or  reports  relating  to  such  Committees, 
and  should  issue  a  memorandum  thereon  for  the  guidance  of 


APPENDIX  IX  439 

employers  and  workpeople  generally,  and  we  understand  that 
such  a  memorandum  is  now  in  course  of  preparation/ 

10.  In  order  to  ensure  uniform  and  common  principles  of 
action,  it  is  essential  that  where  National  and  District  In- 
dustrial Councils  exist  the  Works  Committees  should  be  in  close 
touch  with  them,  and  the  scheme  for  linking  up  Works  Com- 
mittees with  the  Councils  should  be  considered  and  determined 
by  the  National  Councils. 

11.  We  have  considered  it  better  not  to  attempt  to  indicate 
any  specific  form  of  Works  Committees.  Industrial  establish- 
ments show  such  infinite  variation  in  size,  number  of  persons 
employed,  multiplicity  of  departments,  and  other  conditions,  that 
the  particular  form  of  Works  Committees  must  necessarily  be 
adapted  to  the  circumstances  of  each  case.  It  would,  therefore, 
be  impossible  to  formulate  any  satisfactory  scheme  which  does 
not  provide  a  large  measure  of  elasticity. 

We  are  confident  that  the  nature  of  the  particular  organisa- 
tion necessary  for  the  various  cases  will  be  settled  without 
difficulty  by  the  exercise  of  goodwill  on  both  sides. 

J.  H.  Whitley,  Chairman,  F.  S.  Button,  S.  J.  Chapman, 
G.  H.  Claughton,  J.  R.  Clynes,  F.  N.  Hepworth,  Wilfrid 
Hill,  J.  A.  Hobson,  A.  Susan  Lawrence,  Maurice  Levy, 
J.  J.  Mallon,  Thos.  R.  Ratcliffe-Ellis,  Allan  M.  Smith, 
D.  R.  H.  Williams,  Mona  Wilson.^ 

H.  J.  Wilson,  A.  Greenwood,  Secretaries. 

i8th  October,  1917. 

*  This  Memorandum  is  now  completed  and  will  be  published 
by  the  Ministry  of  Labour. 

^  Sir  G.  J.  Carter  and  Mr.  Smillie  were  unable  to  attend  any 
of  the  meetings  at  which  this  Report  was  considered  and  they 
therefore  do  not  sign  it.  Sir  G.  J.  Carter  has  intimated  that 
in  his  view,  in  accordance  with  the  principles  indicated  in 
paragraphs  3,  4  and  5  of  the  Report,  it  is  important  that  Works 
Committees  should  not  deal  with  matters  which  ought  to  be 
directly  dealt  with  by  the  firms  concerned  or  their  respective 
Associations  in  conjunction  with  the  recognised  representatives 
of  the  Trade  Unions  whose  members  are  affected. 


APPENDIX  X 
INDUSTRIAL  COUNCILS  AND  TRADE  BOARDS 

MEMORANDUM    BY    THE    MINISTER    OF   RECONSTRUCTION    AND    THE 
MINISTER   OF  LABOUR 

1.  The  proposals  contained  in  the  First  Report  on  Joint 
Standing  Industrial  Councils  (Cd.  8606)  of  the  Committee  on 
Relations  between  Employers  and  Employed  have  been  adopted 
by  the  Government.  The  steps  which  have  been  taken  to  es- 
tablish Industrial  Councils  have  enabled  the  Government  to  con- 
sider the  proposals  of  the  Second  Report  on  Joint  Standing 
Industrial  Councils  (Cd.  9002)  in  the  light  of  experience.  This 
Report,  which  deals  with  industries  other  than  those  which  are 
highly  organised,  follows  naturally  upon  the  First  Report  of  the 
Committee,  and  develops  the  line  of  policy  therein  proposed.  It 
has  not  been  found  possible  from  the  administrative  point  of 
view  to  adopt  the  whole  of  the  recommendations  contained  in  the 
Second  Report,  but  such  modifications  as  it  seems  desirable  to 
make  do  not  affect  the  principles  underlying  the  Committee's  pro- 
posal for  the  establishment  of  Joint  Industrial  Councils.  They 
are  designed  to  take  advantage  of  the  administrative  experience 
of  the  Ministry  of  Labour  with  regard  to  both  Industrial  Coun- 
cils and  Trade  Boards.  In  view  of  the  growing  interest  which 
is  being  taken  in  the  establishment  of  Industrial  Councils  and 
of  the  proposed  extension  of  Trade  Boards,  it  appears  desirable 
to  set  forth  the  modifications  which  the  Government  regard  as 
necessary  in  putting  into  operation  the  recommendations  of 
the  Second  Report,  and  also  to  make  clear  the  relations  be- 
tween Trade  Boards  and  Industrial  Councils. 

2.  The  First  Report  on  Joint  Standing  Industrial  Councils 
referred  only  to  the  well-organised  industries.  The  Second 
Report  deals  with  the  less  organised  and  unorganised  trades, 
and  suggests  the  classification  of  the  industries  of  the  country 
into  three  groups: — 

440 


APPENDIX  X  441 

"Group  A. — Consisting  of  industries  in  which  organisation  on 
the  part  of  employers  and  employed  is  sufficiently  developed 
to  render  their  respective  associations  representative  of  the 
great  majority  of  those  engaged  in  the  industry.  These  are  the 
industries  which  we  had  in  mind  in  our  first  Interim  Report. 

"Group  B. — Comprising  those  industries  in  which,  either  as 
regards  employers  and  employed,  or  both,  the  degree  of 
organisation,  though  considerable,  is  less  marked  than  in  Group 
A. 

"Group  C. — Consisting  of  industries  in  which  organisation  is 
so  imperfect,  either  as  regards  employers  or  employed,  or 
both,  that  no  associations  can  be  said  adequately  to  represent 
those  engaged  in  the  industry." 

The  proposals  of  the  Committee  on  Relations  between  Em- 
ployers and  Employed  are  summarised  in  paragraph  20  of  their 
Second  Report  as  follows: — 

"(a)  In  the  more  highly  organised  industries  (Group  A.)  we 
proposed  a  triple  organisation  of  national,  district,  and  work- 
shop bodies,  as  outlined  in  our  First  Report. 

"(b)  In  industries  where  there  are  representative  associa- 
tions of  employers  and  employed,  which,  however,  do  not  pos- 
sess the  authority  of  those  in  Group  A.  industries,  we  propose 
that  the  triple  organisation  should  be  modified,  by  attaching  to 
each  National  Industrial  Council  one,  or  at  most  two  representa- 
tives of  the  Ministry  of  Labour  to  act  in  an  advisory  capacity. 

"(c)  In  industries  in  both  Groups  A.  and  B.,  we  propose  that 
unorganised  areas  or  branches  of  an  industry  should  be  pro- 
vided, on  the  application  of  the  National  Industrial  Council,  and 
with  the  approval  of  the  Ministry  of  Labour,  with  Trade  Boards 
for  such  areas  or  branches,  the  Trade  Boards  being  linked  with 
the  Industrial  Council. 

"(d)  In  industries  having  no  adequate  organisation  of  em- 
ployers or  employed,  we  recommend  that  Trade  Boards  should 
be  continued  or  established,  and  that  these  should,  with  the 
approval  of  the  Ministry  of  Labour,  be  enabled  to  formulate  a 
scheme  for  an  Industrial  Council,  which  might  include,  in  an 
advisory  capacity,  the  'appointed  members'  of  the  Trade  Board." 

It  may  be  convenient  to  set  out  briefly  the  modifications  of 
the  above  proposals,  which  it  has  been  found  necessary  to  make. 

(i)  As  regards  (b)  it  has  been  decided  to  recognise  one 
type  of  Industrial  Council  only,  and  not  to  attach  official  repre- 


442  APPENDIX  X 

sentatives  to  the  Council,  except  on  the  application  of  the  In- 
dustrial Council  itself. 

(2)  As  regards  (c)  and  (d)  the  relations  between  Trade 
Boards  and  Industrial  Councils  raise  a  number  of  serious  ad- 
ministrative difficulties  due  to  the  wide  differences  in  the  pur- 
pose and  structure  of  the  two  types  of  bodies.  It  is  not  re- 
garded as  advisable  that  a  Trade  Board  should  formulate  a 
scheme  for  an  Industrial  Council,  nor  is  it  probable  that  Trade 
Boards  for  unorganised  areas  will  be  set  up  in  conjunction  with 
a  Joint  Industrial  Council. 

3.  It  is  necessary  at  the  outset  to  emphasise  the  fundamental 
differences  between  Industrial  Councils  and  Trade  Boards.  A 
Joint  Industrial  Council  is  voluntary  in  its  character  and  can 
only  be  brought  into  existence  with  the  agreement  of  the 
organisations  of  employers  and  workpeople  in  the  particular  in- 
dustry, and  the  Council  itself  is  composed  exclusively  of  per- 
sons nominated  by  the  Employers'  Associations  and  Trade 
Unions  concerned.  The  Industrial  Council  is,  moreover,  within 
very  wide  limits,  able  to  determine  its  own  functions,  machinery 
and  methods  of  working.  Its  functions  in  almost  all  cases  will 
probably  cover  a  wide  range  and  will  be  concerned  with  many 
matters  other  than  wages.  Its  machinery  and  methods  will  be 
based  upon  past  experience  of  the  industry  and  the  existing 
organisation  of  both  employers  and  employed.  Industrial  Coun- 
cils will,  therefore,  vary  in  structure  and  functions  as  can 
be  seen  from  the  provisional  constitutions  already  submitted 
to  the  Ministry  of  Labour.  Financially  they  will  be  self-sup- 
porting, and  will  receive  no  monetary  aid  from  the  Government. 
The  Government  proposes  to  recognise  the  Industrial  Council 
in  an  industry  as  the  representative  organisation  to  which  it 
can  refer.  This  was  made  clear  in  the  Minister  of  Labour's  cir- 
cular letter  of  October  20th,  1917,  in  which  it  is  said  that  "the 
Government  desire  it  to  be  understood  that  the  Councils  will 
be  recognised  as  the  official  standing  consultative  committees 
to  the  Government  on  all  future  questions  affecting  the  in- 
dustries which  they  represent,  and  that  they  will  be  the  nor- 
mal channel  through  which  the  opinion  and  experience  of  an 
industry  will  be  sought  on  all  questions  in  which  the  industry 
is  concerned." 

A  Trade  Board,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  statutory  body  es- 
tablished by  the  Minister  of  Labour  and  constituted  in  accord- 
ance with  Regulations  made  by  him  in  pursuance  of  the  Trade 


APPENDIX  X  443 

Boards  Act;  and  its  expenses,  in  so  far  as  authorised  by  the 
Minister  of  Labour  and  sanctioned  by  the  Treasury,  are  defrayed 
out  of  public  money.  The  Regulations  may  provide  for  the 
election  of  the  representatives  of  employers  and  workers  or 
for  their  nomination  by  the  Minister  of  Labour,  but  in  either 
case  provision  must  be  made  for  the  representation  of  home- 
v^'orkers  in  trades  in  which  a  considerable  proportion  of  home- 
workers  are  engaged.  On  account  of  the  comparative  lack  of 
organisation  in  the  trades  to  which  the  Act  at  present  applies, 
the  method  of  nomination  by  the  Minister  has  proved  in  prac- 
tice to  be  preferable  to  that  of  election,  and  in  nearly  all  cases 
the  representative  members  of  Trade  Boards  are  now  nominated 
by  the  Minister,  The  Employers'  Associations  and  Trade 
Unions  in  the  several  trades  are  invited  to  submit  the  names 
of  candidates  for  the  Minister's  consideration,  and  full  weight 
is  attached  to  their  recommendation,  but  where  the  trade 
organisations  do  not  fully  represent  all  sections  of  the  trade, 
it  is  necessary  to  look  outside  them  to  find  representatives  of 
the  different  processes  and  districts  affected. 

A  further  distinction  between  Trade  Boards  and  Industrial 
Councils  is,  that  while  Industrial  Councils  are  composed  en- 
tirely of  representatives  of  the  Employers'  Associations  and 
Trade  Unions  in  the  industry,  every  Trade  Board  includes,  in 
addition  to  the  representative  members,  a  small  number  (usually 
three)  of  "appointed  members,"  one  of  whom  is  appointed  by 
the  Minister  to  act  as  Chairman  and  one  as  Deputy  Chairman 
of  the  Board.  The  appointed  members  are  unconnected  with 
the  trade  and  are  appointed  by  the  Minister  as  impartial  per- 
sons. The  primary  function  of  a  Trade  Board  is  the  determina- 
tion of  minimum  rates  of  wages,  and  when  the  minimum  rates 
of  wages  fixed  by  a  Trade  Board  have  been  confirmed  by  the 
Minister  of  Labour,  they  are  enforceable  by  criminal  proceed- 
ings, and  officers  are  appointed  to  secure  their  observance.  The 
minimum  rates  thus  become  part  of  the  law  of  the  land,  and  are 
enforced  in  the  same  manner  as,  for  example,  the  provisions 
of  the  Factory  Acts.  The  purpose,  structure,  and  functions 
of  Industrial  Councils  and  Trade  Boards  are  therefore  funda- 
mentally different.  Their  respective  areas  of  operation  are  also 
determined  by  different  considerations.  An  Industrial  Council 
will  exercise  direct  influence  only  over  the  organisations  repre- 
sented upon  it.  It  will  comprise  those  employers'  associations 
with  common  interests  and  common  problems ;  similarly  its  trade 


444  APPENDIX  X 

union  side  will  be  composed  of  representatives  of  organisations 
whose  interests  are  directly  interdependent.  An  Industrial 
Council  therefore  is  representative  of  organisations  whose  ob- 
jects and  interests,  whilst  not  identical,  are  sufficiently  inter- 
locked to  render  common  action  desirable.  The  various 
organisations  represent  the  interests  of  employers  and  workers 
engaged  in  the  production  of  a  particular  commodity  or  serv- 
ice (or  an  allied  group  of  commodities  or  services). 

A  Trade  Board,  on  the  other  hand,  is  not  based  on  existing 
organisations  of  employers  and  employed,  but  covers  the  whole 
of  the  trade  for  which  it  is  established.  As  the  minimum  rates 
are  enforceable  by  law,  it  is  necessary  that  the  boundaries  of 
the  trade  should  be  precisely  defined;  this  is  done,  within  the 
limits  prescribed  by  statute,  by  the  Regulations  made  by  the 
Minister  of  Labour.  Natural  divisions  of  industry  are,  of 
course,  followed  as  far  as  possible,  but  in  many  cases  the  line 
of  demarcation  must  necessarily  be  somewhat  arbitrary.  In 
the  case  of  Industrial  Councils  difficult  demarcation  problems 
also  arise,  but  the  considerations  involved  are  somewhat  dif- 
ferent, as  the  object  is  to  determine  whether  the  interests  rep- 
resented by  given  organisations  are  sufficiently  allied  to  justify 
the  co-operation  of  these  organisations  in  one  Industrial  Coun- 
cil. 

4.  The  reports  received  from  those  who  are  engaged  in  as- 
sisting the  formation  of  Joint  Industrial  Councils  show  that 
certain  paragraphs  in  the  Second  Report, of  the  Committee  on 
Relations  between  Employers  and  Employed  have  caused  some 
confusion  as  to  the  character  and  scope  of  Joint  Industrial 
Councils  and  Trade  Boards  respectively.  It  is  essential  to  the 
future  development  of  Joint  Industrial  Councils  that  their  dis- 
tinctive aim  and  character  should  be  maintained.  It  is  neces- 
sary therefore  to  keep  clearly  in  mind  the  respective  functions 
of  the  Joint  Industrial  Council  and  the  Trade  Board,  in  con- 
sidering the  recommendations  contained  in  the  following  para- 
graphs of  the  Second  Report: — 

(a)  Paragraphs  3,  4  and  5,  dealing  with  the  division  of  Joint 
Industrial  Councils  into  those  that  cover  Group  A.  industries, 
and  those  that  cover  Group  B.  industries. 

(b)  Paragraph  7,  dealing  with  district  Industrial  Councils  in 
industries  where  no  National  Council  exists. 

(c)  Paragraphs  10,  13,  15  and  16,  dealing  with  Trade  Boards 
in  relation  to  Joint  Industrial  Councils. 


APPENDIX  X  445 

(rf)  Paragraphs  ii  and  12,  dealing  with  Trade  Boards  in 
industries  which  are  not  suitably  organised  for  the  establishment 
of  a  Joint  Industrial  Council. 

5.  Distinction  drazvn  hctivecn  Joint  Industrial  Councils  in 
Group  A.  Industries  and  Group  B.  Industries. — In  paragraph  9 
of  the  Second  Report  it  is  implied  that  the  Ministry  of  LalDOur 
would  determine  whether  the  standard  of  organisation  in  any 
given  industry  has  reached  such  a  stage  as  to  justify  the  of- 
ficial recognition  of  a  Joint  Industrial  Council  in  that  industry. 
It  is  clear,  however,  that  it  would  be  impossible  for  the  Ministry 
to  discover  any  satisfactory  basis  for  distinguishing  between 
an  industry  which  falls  into  Group  A.,  and  one  which  falls  into 
Group  B.  It  is  admitted  in  paragraph  9  of  the  Second  Report, 
that  no  arbitrary  standard  of  organisation  could  be  adopted, 
and  it  would  be  both  invidious  and  impracticable  for  the  Ministry 
of  Labour,  upon  whom  the  responsibility  would  fall,  to  draw  a 
distinction  between  A.  and  B.  Industries.  The  only  clear  dis- 
tinction is  between  industries  which  are  sufficiently  organised 
to  justify  the  formation  of  a  Joint  Industrial  Council,  and 
those  which  are  not  sufficiently  organised.  Individual  cases 
must  be  judged  on  their  merits  after  a  consideration  of  the 
scope  and  effectiveness  of  the  organisation,  the  complexity  of 
the  industry  and  the  wishes  of  those  concerned. 

The  experience  already  gained  in  connection  with  Joint  In- 
dustrial Councils  indicates  that  it  would  be  inadvisable  in  the 
case  of  industries  in  Group  B.  to  adopt  the  proposal  that  "there 
should  be  appointed  one  or  at  most  two  official  representa- 
tives to  assist  in  the  initiation  of  the  Council  and  continue 
after  its  establishment  to  act  in  an  advisory  capacity  and  serve 
as  a  link  with  the  Government."  It  is  fundamental  to  the  idea 
of  a  Joint  Industrial  Council  that  it  is  a  voluntary  body  set  up 
by  the  industry  itself,  acting  as  an  independent  body  and  en- 
tirely free  from  all  State  control.  Whilst  the  Minister  of 
Labour  would  be  willing  to  give  every  assistance  to  Industrial 
Councils,  he  would  prefer  that  any  suggestion  of  this  kind  should 
come  from  the  industry,  rather  than  from  the  Ministry. 

The  main  idea  of  the  Joint  Industrial  Council  as  a  Joint  Body 
representative  of  an  industry  and  independent  of  State  control 
has  now  become  familiar,  and  the  introduction  of  a  second 
type  of  Joint  Industrial  Council  for  B.  industries  would  be 
likely  to  cause  confusion  and  possibly  to  prejudice  the  future 
growth  of  Joint  Industrial  Councils. 


446  APPENDIX  X 

In  view  of  these  circumstances,  therefore,  it  has  been  de- 
cided to  adopt  a  single  type  of  Industrial  Council. 

6.  District  Industrial  Councils. — Paragraph  7  of  the  Second 
Report  suggests  that  in  certain  industries  in  which  a  National 
Industrial  Council  is  not  likely  to  be  formed,  in  the  immediate 
future,  it  might  none  the  less  be  possible  to  form  one  or  more 
"District"  Industrial  Councils. 

In  certain  cases  the  formation  of  joint  bodies  covering  a 
limited  area  is  probable.  It  would,  however,  avoid  confusion  if 
the  term  "District"  were  not  part  of  the  title  of  such  Coun- 
cils, and  if  the  use  of  it  were  confined  to  District  Councils  in 
an  industry  where  a  National  Council  exists.  Independent  local 
Councils  might  well  have  a  territorial  designation  instead. 

7.  Trade  Boards  in  Relation  to  Joint  Industrial  Councils. — 
The  distinction  between  Trade  Boards  and  Joint  Industrial 
Councils  has  been  set  forth  in  paragraph  3  above.  The  ques- 
tion whether  an  Industrial  Council  should  be  formed  for  a 
given  industry  depends  on  the  degree  of  organisation  achieved 
by  the  employers  and  workers  in  the  industry,  whereas  the 
question  whether  a  Trade  Board  should  be  established  de- 
pends primarily  on  the  rates  of  wages  prevailing  in  the  in- 
dustry or  in  any  part  of  the  industry.  This  distinction  makes 
it  clear  that  the  question  whether  a  Trade  Board  should  or 
should  not  be  set  up  by  the  Minister  of  Labour  for  a  given  in- 
dustry, must  be  decided  apart  from  the  question  whether  a  Joint 
Industrial  Council  should  or  should  not  be  recognised  in  that  in- 
dustry by  the  Minister  of  Labour. 

It  follows  from  this  that  it  is  possible  that  both  a  Joint  In- 
dustrial Council  and  a  Trade  Board  may  be  necessary  within 
the  same  industry. 

In  highly  organised  industries,  the  rates  of  wages  prevailing 
will  not,  as  a  rule,  be  so  low  as  to  necessitate  the  establishment 
of  a  Trade  Board.  In  some  cases,  however,  a  well-defined  sec- 
tion of  an  otherwise  well-organised  industry  or  group  of  in- 
dustries may  be  unorganised  and  ill-paid;  in  such  a  case  it 
would  clearly  be  desirable  for  a  Trade  Board  to  be  established 
for  the  ill-paid  section,  while  there  should  at  the  same  time  be 
an  Industrial  Council  for  the  remaining  sections,  or  even  for  the 
whole,  of  the  industry  or  industrial  group. 

In  the  case  of  other  industries  sufficiently  organised  to  justify 
the  establishment  of  an  Industrial  Council,  the  organisations 
represented  on  the  Council  may  nevertheless  not  be  compre- 


APPENDIX  X  447 

hensive  enough  to  regulate  wages  effectively  throughout  the 
industry.  In  such  cases  a  Trade  Board  for  the  whole  industry 
may  possibly  be  needed. 

Where  a  Trade  Board  covers  either  the  whole  or  part  of 
an  industry  covered  by  a  Joint  Industrial  Council,  the  relations 
between  them  may,  in  order  to  avoid  any  confusion  or  misun- 
derstanding, be  defined  as  follows : — 

(i)  Where  Government  Departments  wish  to  consult  the  in- 
dustry, the  Joint  Industrial  Council,  and  not  the  Trade  Board, 
will  be  recognised  as  the  body  to  be  consulted. 

(2)  In  order  to  make  use  of  the  experience  of  the  Trade 
Board,  the  constitution  of  the  Industrial  Council  should  be  so 
drawn  as  to  make  full  provision  for  consultation  between  the 
Council  and  the  Trade  Board  on  matters  referred  to  the  former 
by  a  Government  Department,  and  to  allow  of  the  representa- 
tion of  the  Trade  Board  on  any  Sub-Committee  of  the  Council 
dealing  with  questions  with  which  the  Trade  Board  is  con- 
cerned. 

(3)  The  Joint  Industrial  Council  clearly  cannot  under  any 
circumstances  over-ride  the  statutory  powers  conferred  vipon 
the  Trade  Board,  and  if  the  Government  at  any  future  time 
adopted  the  suggestion  contained  in  Section  21  of  the  First 
Report  that  the  sanction  of  law  should  be  given  on  the  appli- 
cation of  an  Industrial  Council  to  agreements  made  by  the 
Council,  such  agreements  could  not  be  made  binding  on  any 
part  of  a  trade  governed  by  a  Trade  Board,  so  far  as  the 
statutory  powers  of  the  Trade  Board  are  concerned. 

The  Minister  of  Labour  will  not  ordinarily  set  up  a  Trade 
Board  to  deal  with  an  industry  or  branch  of  an  industry,  in 
which  the  majority  of  employers  and  workpeople  are  covered 
by  wage  agreements,  but  in  which  a  minority,  possibly  in  certain 
areas,  are  outside  the  agreement.  It  would  appear  that  the  pro- 
posal in  Section  21  of  the  First  Report  was  specially  designed 
to  meet  such  cases.  Experience  has  shown  that  there  are 
great  difficulties  in  the  way  of  establishing  a  Trade  Board  for 
one  area  only  in  which  an  industry  is  carried  on,  without  cover- 
ing the  whole  of  a  Trade,  though  the  Trade  Boards  Act  allows 
of  this  procedure. 

8.  Trade  Boards  in  industries  zvhich  are  not  sufficiently 
organised  for  the  establishment  of  a  Joint  Industrial  Council. — 
Section  3  of  the  Trade  Boards  Act,  1909,  provides  that  "a 
Trade  Board  for  any  trade  shall  consider,  as  occasion  requires, 


448  APPENDIX  X 

any  matter  referred  to  them  by  a  Secretary  of  State,  the  Board 
of  Trade,  or  any  other  Government  Department,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  industrial  conditions  of  the  trade,  and  shall  make 
a  report  upon  the  matter  to  the  department  by  whom  the  ques- 
tion has  been  referred." 

In  the  case  of  an  industry  in  which  a  Trade  Board  has  been 
established,  but  an  Industrial  Council  has  not  been  formed,  the 
Trade  Board  is  the  only  body  that  can  claim  to  be  representa- 
tive of  the  industry  as  a  whole. 

It  is  already  under  a  statutory  obligation  to  consider  questions 
referred  to  it  by  a  Government  Department;  and  where  there 
is  a  Trade  Board  but  no  Industrial  Council  in  an  industry  it 
will  be  suggested  to  Government  Departments  that  they  should 
consult  the  Trade  Board  as  occasion  requires  in  the  same  man- 
ner as  they  would  consult  Industrial  Councils. 

On  the  other  hand,  for  the  reasons  which  have  been  fully  set 
out  above.  Industrial  Councils  must  be  kept  distinct  from  Trade 
Boards,  and  the  latter,  owing  to  their  constitution,  cannot  be 
converted  into  the  former.  If  an  industry  in  which  a  Trade 
Board  is  established  becomes  sufficiently  organised  for  the  for- 
mation of  an  Industrial  Council,  the  Council  would  have  to  be 
formed  on  quite  different  lines  from  the  Trade  Board,  and  the 
initiative  should  come,  not  from  the  Trade  Board,  which  is  a 
body  mainly  nominated  by  the  Minister  of  Labour,  but  from  the 
organisations  in  the  industry.  Hence  it  would  not  be  desirable 
that  Trade  Boards  should  undertake  the  formation  of  schemes 
for  Industrial  Councils. 

Ministry  of  Reconstruction. 


APPENDIX  XI 
NATIONAL  COUNCIL  OF  THE  POTTERY  INDUSTRY 

OBJECTS 

The  advancement  of  the  Pottery  Industry  and  of  all  con- 
nected with  it  by  the  association  in  its  government  of  all  en- 
gaged in  the  industry. 

It  will  be  open  to  the  Council  to  take  any  action  that  falls 
within  the  scope  of  its  general  object.  Its  chief  work  will, 
however,  fall  under  the  following  heads: — 

(a)  The  consideration  of  means  whereby  all  Manufacturers 
and  Operatives  shall  be  brought  within  their  respective  asso- 
ciations. 

(b)  Regular  consideration  of  wages,  piecework  prices,  and 
conditions  with  a  view  to  establishing  and  maintaining  equitable 
conditions  throughout  the  industry. 

(c)  To  assist  the  respective  Associations  in  the  maintenance 
of  such  selling  prices  as  will  afford  a  reasonable  remuneration 
to  both  employers  and  employed. 

(d)  The  consideration  and  settlement  of  all  disputes  be- 
tween different  parties  in  the  industry  which  it  may  not  have 
been  possible  to  settle  by  the  existing  machinery,  and  the 
establishment  of  machinery  for  dealing  with  disputes  where 
adequate  machinery  does  not  exist. 

(e)  The  regularisation  of  production  and  employment  as 
a  means  of  insuring  to  the  workpeople  the  greatest  possible 
security  of  earnings. 

(f)  Improvement  in  conditions  with  a  view  to  removing  all 
danger  to  health  in  the  industry. 

(g)  The  study  of  processes,  the  encouragement  of  research, 
and  the  full  utilisation  of  their  results. 

(h)  The  provision  of  facilities  for  the  full  consideration 
and  the  utilisation  of  inventions  and  improvements  designed  by 

449 


450  APPENDIX  XI 

workpeople  and  for  the  adequate  safeguarding  of  the  rights 
of  the  designers  of  such  improvements. 

(i)     Education  in  all  its  branches  for  the  industry. 

(j)  The  collection  of  full  statistics  on  wages,  making  and 
selling  prices,  and  average  percentages  of  profits  on  turnover, 
and  on  materials,  markets,  costs,  etc.,  and  the  study  and  pro- 
motion of  scientific  and  practical  systems  of  costing  to  this 
end. 

All  statistics  shall,  where  necessary,  be  verified  by  Chartered 
Accountants,  who  shall  make  a  statutory  declaration  as  to 
secrecy  prior  to  any  investigation,  and  no  particulars  of  in- 
dividual firms  or  operatives  shall  be  disclosed  to  any  one. 

(k)  Enquiries  into  problems  of  the  industry,  and  where 
desirable,  the  publication  of  reports. 

(1)  Representation  of  the  needs  and  opinions  of  the  industry 
to  Government  authorities,  central  and  local,  and  to  the  com- 
munity generally. 

CONSTITUTION 

(i)  Membership.  The  Council  shall  consist  of  an  equal 
number  of  representatives  of  the  Manufacturers  and  the  Opera- 
tives; the  Manufacturers'  representatives  to  be  appointed  by  the 
Manufacturers'  Associations  in  proportions  to  be  agreed  on 
between  them;  the  Operatives'  representatives  by  the  Trade 
Unions  in  proportions  to  be  agreed  on  between  them.  The 
number  of  representatives  on  each  side  shall  not  exceed  30. 
Among  the  Manufacturers'  representatives  may  be  included 
salaried  managers,  and  among  the  Operatives'  representatives 
some  women  operatives. 

(2)  Honorary  Members.  The  Council  to  have  the  power 
to  co-opt  Honorary  Members  with  the  right  to  attend  meetings 
or  serve  on  committees  of  the  Council,  and  to  speak  but  not 
to  vote. 

(3)  Re-appointment.  One-third  of  the  representatives  of  the 
said  Associations  and  Unions  shall  retire  annually,  and  shall  be 
eligible  for  re-appointment. 

(4)  Officers.     The  Officers  of  the  council  shall  be: — 

(a)     A  Chairman  and  Vice-Chairman.     When  the  Chair- 
man is  a  member  of  the  Operatives,  the  Vice-Chairman  shall 
be   a  member  of  the  Manufacturers,   and  vice-versa.     The 
Chairman   (or,  in  his  absence,  the  Vice-Chairman)   shall  pre- 
side at  all  meetings,  and  shall  have  a  vote,  but  not  a  casting 


APPENDIX  XI  451 

vote.     It  shall  always  be  open  to  the  Council  to  appoint  an 
Independent  Chairman,  temporary  or  otherwise. 

(b)     Such  Secretaries  and  Treasurers  as  the  Council  may 
require. 

All  Honorary  Officers  shall  be  elected  by  the  Council  at  its 
annual  meeting  for  a  term  of  one  year,  and,  subject  to  the 
condition  that  a  Chairman  or  Vice-Chairman  from  the  said 
Associations  shall  be  succeeded  by  a  member  of  the  said  Unions, 
shall  be  eligible  for  re-election.  The  Council  may  from  time 
to  time  fix  the  remuneration  to  be  paid  to  its  Officers. 

(5)  Committees.  The  Council  shall  appoint  an  Executive 
Committee,  and  Standing  Committees,  representative  of  the 
different  needs  of  the  industry.  It  shall  have  power  to  appoint 
other  Committees  for  special  purposes,  and  to  co-opt  such  per- 
sons of  special  knowledge,  not  being  members  of  the  Council, 
as  may  serve  the  special  purposes  of  these  committees.  On 
all  Committees  both  Manufacturers  and  Operatives  shall  be 
equally  represented.  The  minutes  of  all  Committees  shall  be 
submitted  to  the  National  Council  for  confirmation. 

Each  Committee  shall  appoint  its  own  Chairman  and  Vice- 
Chairman,  except  in  the  case  of  the  Finance  Committee,  over 
which  Committee  the  Chairman  of  the  National  Council  shall 
preside. 

(6)  Finance.  The  ordinary  expenses  of  the  Council  shall  be 
met  by  a  levy  upon  the  Manufacturers'  Associations  and  the 
Trade  Unions  represented.  Special  expenditures  shall  be  pro- 
vided for  by  the  Finance  Committee. 

(7)  Meetings.  The  ordinary  meetings  of  the  Council  shall 
be  held  quarterly.  The  annual  meeting  shall  be  held  in  January. 
A  special  meeting  of  the  Council  shall  be  held  on  the  requisition 
of  ten  members  of  the  Council.  Seven  days'  notice  of  any 
meeting  shall  be  given.  Twenty  members  shall  form  a  quorum. 
Committees  shall  meet  as  often  as  may  be  required. 

(8)  Voting.  The  voting  upon  all  questions  shall  be  by  show 
of  hands,  and  two-thirds  majority  of  those  present  and  voting 
shall  be  required  to  carry  a  resolution.  Provided  that,  when 
at  any  meeting  the  representatives  of  the  unions  and  the  asso- 
ciations respectively,  are  unequal  in  numbers,  all  members  pres- 
ent shall  have  the  right  to  enter  fully  into  discussion  of  any 
matters,  but  only  an  equal  number  of  each  of  such  representa- 
tives (to  be  decided  amongst  them)  shall  vote. 


APPENDIX  Xir 

WORKSHOP  COMMITTEES 

SUGGESTED  LINES  OF  DEVELOPMENT 

By  C.  G.  Renold 

(From  the  Surzrey,  Oct.  6,  191 8,  which  reprinted  the  pam- 
phlet under  cabled  permission  of  the  author.) 

PREFACE 

Some  time  ago  I  was  asked  to  prepare  a  memorandum  on 
the  subject  of  Workshop  Committees,  for  presentation  to  the 
British  Association,  as  a  part  of  the  report  of  a  special  sub- 
committee studying  industrial  unrest.  The  following  pages  con- 
tain the  gist  of  that  memorandum,  and  are  now  issued  in  this 
form  for  the  benefit  of  some  of  those  interested  in  the  problem 
who  may  not  see  the  original  report. 

I  have  approached  the  subject  with  the  conviction  that  the 
worker's  desire  for  more  scope  in  his  working  life  can  best 
be  satisfied  by  giving  him  some  share  in  the  directing  of  it; 
if  not  of  the  work  itself,  at  least  of  the  conditions  under  which 
it  is  carried  out.  I  have  tried,  therefore,  to  work  out  in  some 
detail  the  part  which  organisations  of  workers  might  play  in 
works  administration.  And  believing  as  I  do,  that  the  exist- 
ing industrial  system,  with  all  its  faults  and  injustices,  must 
still  form  the  basis  of  any  future  system,  I  am  concerned  to 
show  that  a  considerable  development  of  joint  action  between 
management  and  workers  is  possible,  even  under  present  con- 
ditions. 

Many  of  the  ideas  put  forward  are  already  incorporated  to  a 
greater  or  lesser  degree  in  the  institution  of  these  works,  but 
these  notes  are  not  intended,  primarily,  as  an  account  of  our 
experiments,   still   less   as  a   forecast  of   the   future  plans  of 

AS2 


APPENDIX  XII  453 

this  firm.  Our  own  experience  and  hopes  do,  however,  form 
the  basis  of  much  here  written,  and  have  inevitably  influenced 
the  general  line  of  thought  followed. 

Burnage  Works,  September,  1917. 

C.   G.  Renold,  Hans  Renold  Limited,  Manchester. 


INTRODUCTION 

Throughout  the  following  notes  it  is  assumed  that  the  need 
is  realised  for  a  new  orientation  of  ideas  with  regard  to  indus- 
trial management.  It  is  further  assumed  that  the  trend  of 
such  ideas  must  be  in  the  direction  of  a  devolution  of  some 
of  the  functions  and  responsibilities  of  management  on  to  the 
workers  themselves.  These  notes,  therefore,  are  concerned 
mainly  with  considering  how  far  this  devolution  can  be  carried 
under  present  conditions,  and  the  necessary  machinery  for  en- 
abling it  to  operate. 

Before  passing,  however,  to  detailed  schemes,  it  is  worth 
considering  briefly  what  the  aims  of  this  devolution  are. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  conditions  of  industrial  life 
fail  to  satisfy  the  deeper  needs  of  the  workers,  and  that  it 
is  this  failure,  even  more  than  low  wages,  which  is  responsible 
for  much  of  their  general  unrest.  Now  the  satisfaction  to  be 
derived  from  work  depends  upon  its  being  a  means  of  self- 
expression.  This  again  depends  on  the  power  of  control  exer- 
cised by  the  individual  over  the  materials  and  processes  used, 
and  the  conditions  under  which  the  work  is  carried  out,  or 
in  the  case  of  complicated  operations,  where  the  individual 
can  hardly  be  other  than  a  "cog  in  the  machine," — on  the 
willingness,  understanding,  and  imagination  with  which  he 
undertakes  such  a  role.  In  the  past  the  movement  in  industry, 
in  this  respect,  has  been  all  in  the  wrong  direction,  namely,  a 
continual  reduction  of  freedom,  initiative,  and  interest,  in- 
volving an  accentuation  of  the  "cog-in-the-machine"  status. 
Moreover,  it  has  too  often  produced  a  "cog"  blind  and  un- 
willing, with  no  perspective  or  understanding  of  the  part  it 
plays  in  the  general  mechanism  of  production,  or  even  in  any 
one  particular  series  of  operations. 

Each  successive  step  in  the  splitting  up  and  specialising  of 
operations  has  been  taken  with  a  view  to  promoting  efficiency 
of  production,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  efficiency,  in  a 
material  sense,  has  been  achieved  thereby,  and  the  productivity 


454  APPENDIX  XII 

of  industry  greatly  increased.  This  has  been  done,  however, 
at  the  cost  of  pleasure  and  interest  in  work,  and  the  problem 
now  is  how  far  these  could  be  restored,  as,  for  instance,  by 
some  devolution  of  management  responsibility  on  to  the  work- 
ers, and  how  far  such  devolution  is  possible  under  the  competi- 
tive capitalist  system,  which  is  likely  to  dominate  industry  for 
many  long  years  to  come. 

Under  the  conditions  of  capitalist  industry  any  scheme  of 
devolution  of  management  can  only  stand  provided  it  in- 
volves no  net  loss  of  productive  efficiency.  It  is  believed, 
however,  that  even  within  these  limits,  considerable  progress 
in  this  direction  is  possible,  doubtless  involving  some  detail 
loss,  but  with  more  than  compensating  gains  in  general  effi- 
ciency. In  this  connection  it  must  be  remembered  that  the 
work  of  very  many  men,  probably  of  most,  is  given  more  or 
less  unwillingly,  and  even  should  the  introduction  of  more 
democratic  methods  of  business  management  entail  a  certain 
amount  of  loss  of  mechanical  efficiency,  due  to  the  greater 
cumbersomeness  of  democratic  proceedings,  if  it  can  succeed  in 
obtaining  more  willing  work  and  co-operation,  the  net  gain  in 
productivity  would  be  enormous. 

Important  and  urgent  as  is  this  problem  of  rearranging  the 
machinery  of  management  to  enable  responsibility  and  power 
to  be  shared  with  the  workers,  another  and  preliminary  step 
is  even  more  pressing.  This  is  the  establishing  of  touch  and 
understanding  between  employer  and  employed,  between  man- 
agement and  worker.  Quite  apart  from  the  many  real  griev- 
ances under  which  workers  in  various  trades  are  suffering  at 
the  present  time,  there  is  a  vast  amount  of  bad  feeling,  due  to 
misunderstanding,  on  the  part  of  each  side,  of  the  aims  and  mo- 
tives of  the  other.  Each  party,  believing  the  other  to  be  al- 
ways ready  to  play  foul,  finds  in  every  move  easy  evidence  to 
support  its  bitterest  suspicions.  The  workers  are  irritated  be- 
yond measure  by  the  inefficiency  and  blundering  in  organisation 
and  management  which  they  detect  on  every  side,  and  know- 
ing nothing  of  business  management  cannot  understand  or 
make  allowance  for  the  enormous  difficulties  under  which  em- 
ployers labour  at  the  present  time.  Similarly,  employers  are 
too  ignorant  of  trade  union  affairs  to  appreciate  the  problems 
which  the  present  "lightning  transformation"  of  industry  pre- 
sents to  those  responsible  for  shaping  trade  union  policy;  nor 
is  the  employer  generally  in  close  enough  human  touch  to  realise 


APPENDIX  XII  455 

the  effect  of  the  long  strain  of  war  work,  and  of  the  harassing 
restrictions  of  personal  liberty. 

More  important  therefore  than  any  reconstruction  of  man- 
agement machinery,  more  important  even  than  the  remedying 
of  specific  grievances,  is  the  establishing  of  some  degree  of 
ordinary  human  touch  and  sympathy  between  management 
and  men. 

This  also  has  an  important  bearing  on  any  discussion  with 
regard  to  developing  machinery  for  joint  action.  It  cannot 
be  emphasized  too  strongly  that  the  hopefulness  of  any  such 
attempt  lies,  not  in  the  perfection  of  the  machinery,  nor  even 
in  the  wideness  of  the  powers  of  self-government  granted  to 
the  workers,  but  in  the  degree  to  which  touch  and,  if  possible, 
friendliness  can  be  established.  It  should  be  realised,  for  in- 
stance, by  employers,  that  time  spent  on  discussing  and  ven- 
tilating alleged  grievances  which  turn  out  to  be  no  grievances, 
may  be  quite  as  productive  of  understanding  and  good  feeling 
as  the  removal  of  real  grievances. 

Passing  now  to  constructive  proposals  for  devolution  of  man- 
agement, the  subject  is  here  dealt  with  mainly  in  two  stages. 

Under  Section  I,  some  of  the  functions  of  management 
which  most  concern  the  workers  are  considered,  with  a  view 
to  seeing  how  far  the  autocratic  (or  bureaucratic)  secrecy  and 
exclusiveness  which  usually  surround  business  management, 
as  far  as  workers  are  concerned,  is  really  unavoidable,  or  how 
far  it  could  be  replaced  by  democratic  discussion  and  joint 
action.  The  conclusion  is  that  there  is  no  reason  inherent  in 
the  nature  of  the  questions  themselves  why  this  cannot  be  done 
to  a  very  considerable  extent. 

Section  II  deals  with  the  second  stage  referred  to,  and 
considers  the  machinery  needed  to  make  such  joint  action,  as 
is  suggested  in  Section  I,  workable — a  very  different  matter 
from  admitting  that  in  itself  it  is  not  impossible !  The  ap- 
parent complication  of  such  machinery  is  doubtless  a  difficulty, 
but  it  is  not  insuperable,  and  is  in  practice  less  formidable 
than  it  seems  at  first  sight.  It  must  be  realised,  however,  that 
the  degree  of  elaboration  of  the  machinery  for  joint  working, 
adopted  by  any  particular  industry  or  firm,  must  be  in  relation 
to  the  elaboration  of  the  existing  management  system.  It  would 
be  quite  impossible  for  many  of  the  refinements  of  discussion 
and  joint  action  suggested  to  be  adopted  by  a  firm  whose  or- 
dinary business  organisation  was  crude,  undeveloped,  and  un- 


4S6  APPENDIX  XII 

systematic.    This  point  is  more  fully  dealt  with  in  this  section. 

Section  III  contains  a  summary  of  the  scheme  of  Commit- 
tees contained  in  Section  II,  showing  the  distribution  to  each 
committee  of  the  various  questions  discussed  in  Section  I. 

In  Section  IV  some  comments  are  made,  based  on  actual  ex- 
perience of  an  attempt  to  institute  machinery  of  the  kind  dis- 
cussed, and  some  practical  hints  are  given  which  may  be  of 
assistance  to  others. 

I.      SCOPE  OF  workers'   SHOP  ORGANISATIONS;    MANAGEMENT 

QUESTIONS  WHICH  COULD  BE  DEVOLVED,  WHOLLY 

OR   IN   PART 

It  is  proposed  in  this  section  to  consider  the  activities  which 
organisations  of  workers  within  the  workshop  might  under- 
take without  any  radical  reorganisation  of  industry.  What 
functions  and  powers,  usually  exercised  by  the  management, 
could  be  devolved  on  to  the  workers,  and  what  questions,  usually 
considered  private  by  the  management,  could  be  made  the  sub- 
ject of  explanation  and  consultation?  The  number  of  such  ques- 
tions as  set  out  in  this  section  may  appear  very  formidable,  and 
is  possibly  too  great  to  be  dealt  with,  except  by  a  very  gradual 
process.  No  thought  is  given  at  this  stage,  however,  to  the 
machinery  which  would  be  necessary  for  achieving  so  much 
joint  working,  the  subject  being  considered  rather  with  a  view 
to  seeing  how  far,  and  in  what  directions,  the  inherent  nature 
of  the  questions  themselves  would  make  it  possible  or  advisable 
to  break  down  the  censorship  and  secrecy  which  surround  busi- 
ness management. 

In  the  list  which  follows,  obviously  not  all  questions  are  of 
equal  urgency,  those  being  most  important  which  provide 
means  of  consultation  and  conciliation  in  regard  to  such  mat- 
ters as  most  frequently  give  lise  to  disputes,  namely,  wage 
and  piece-rate  questions,  and  to  a  lesser  degree,  workshop  prac- 
tices and  customs.  Any  scheme  of  joint  working  should  begin 
with  these  matters,  the  others  beinf  taken  over  as  the  machinery 
settles  down  and  it  is  found  practicable  to  do  so.  How  far  any 
particular  business  can  go  will  depend  on  the  circumstances 
of  the  trade,  and  on  the  type  of  organisation  in  operation. 

Though  machinery  for  conciliation  in  connection  with  ex- 
isting troubles,  such  as  those  mentioned,  must  be  the  first  care, 
some  of  the  other  matters  suggested  in  this  section — e.g.,  safety 


APPENDIX  XII  457 

and  hygiene,  shop  amenities,  etc. — should  be  dealt  with  at  the 
earliest  possible  moment.  Such  subjects,  being  less  contro- 
versial, offer  an  easier  means  of  approach  for  establishing  touch 
and  understanding  between  managers  and  men. 

The  suggestions  in  this  section  are  divided  into  two  main 
groups,  but  this  division  is  rather  a  matter  of  convenience  than 
an  indication  of  any  vital  difference  in  nature.  The  sugges- 
tions are  arranged  in  order  of  urgency,  those  coming  first 
where  the  case  for  establishing  a  workers'  shop  organisation 
is  so  clear  as  to  amount  to  a  right,  and  passing  gradually  to 
those  where  the  case  is  more  and  more  questionable.  The 
first  group,  therefore,  contains  all  those  items  where  the  case 
is  clearest  and  in  connection  with  which  the  immediate  bene- 
fits would  fall  to  the  workers.  The  second  group  contains  the 
more  questionable  items,  which  lie  beyond  the  region  where 
the  shoe  actually  pinches  the  worker.  These  questions  are 
largely  educational,  and  the  immediate  benefit  of  action,  con- 
sidered as  a  business  proposition,  would  accrue  to  the  manage- 
ment through  the  greater  understanding  of  management  and 
business  difficulties  on  the  part  of  the  workers. 

I.    Questions  in  Connection  with  Which  Shop  Organisations 
Would  Primarily  Benefit  the  Workers 

This  group  deals  with  those  matters  where  the  case  for  es- 
tablishing shop  organisations,  to  meet  the  need  of  the  workers, 
is  clearest. 

(a)  Collective  Bargaining:  There  is  a  need  for  machinery 
for  carrying  this  function  of  the  trade  union  into  greater  and 
more  intimate  workshop  detail  than  is  possible  by  any  outside 
body.  A  workshop  organisation  might  supplement  the  ordinary 
trade  union  activities  in  the  following  directions: — 

(i.)  Wages  (Note. — General  standard  rates  would  be  fixed 
by  negotiation  with  the  trade  union  for  an  entire  district,  not 
by  committees  of  workers  in  individual  works). 

To  ensure  the  application  of  standard  rates  to  individuals,  to 
see  that  they  get  the  benefit  of  the  trade  union  agreements. 

When  a  scale  of  wages,  instead  of  a  single  rate,  applies  to  a 
class  of  work  (the  exact  figure  varying  according  to  the  ex- 
perience, length  of  service,  etc.,  of  the  worker)  to  see  that  such 
scales  are  applied  fairly. 


4S8  APPENDIX  XII 

To  see  that  promises  of  advances  (such  as  those  made,  for  in- 
stance, at  the  time  of  engagement)  are  fulfilled. 

To  see  that  apprentices,  on  completing  their  time,  are  raised 
to  the  standard  rate  by  the  customary  or  agreed  steps. 

(2.)  Piece  Work  Rates:  (It  is  assumed  that  the  general 
method  of  rate  fixing — c.  g.,  the  adoption  of  time  study  or 
other  method — would  be  settled  with  the  local  trade  unions.) 

To  discuss  with  the  management  the  detailed  methods  of  rate 
fixing,  as  applied  either  to  individual  jobs  or  to  particular  classes 
of  work. 

Where  there  is  an  agreed  relation  between  time  rates  and 
piece  rates  as,  for  instance,  in  engineering,  to  see  that  indi- 
vidual piece  rates  are  so  set  as  to  yield  the  standard  rate  of 
earning. 

To  discuss  with  the  management  reduction  of  piece  rates 
where  these  can  be  shown  to  yield  higher  earnings  than  the 
standard. 

To  investigate  on  behalf  of  the  workers  complaints  as  to  in- 
ability to  earn  the  standard  rate.  For  this  purpose  all  the  data 
and  calculations,  both  with  regard  to  the  original  setting  of  the 
rate  and  with  regard  to  time  booking  on  a  particular  job,  would 
have  to  be  open  for  examination. 

Note. — It  is  doubtful  whether  a  shop  committee,  on  account  of 
its  cumbersomeness,  could  ever  handle  detail,  individual  rates, 
except  where  the  jobs  dealt  with  are  so  large  or  so  standardised 
as  to  make  the  number  of  rates  to  be  set  per  week  quite  small. 
A  better  plan  would  be  for  a  representative  of  the  workers, 
preferably  paid  by  them,  to  be  attached  to  the  rate-fixing 
department  of  a  works,  to  check  all  calculations,  and  to  look 
after  the  workers'  interests  generally.  He  would  report  to  a 
shop  committee,  whose  discussions  with  the  management  would 
then  be  limited  to  questions  of  principle. 

(3.)  Watching  the  Application  of  Special  Legislation, 
Awards,  or  Agreements — e.  g.  :  Munitions  of  war  act,  dilution, 
leaving  certificates,  etc.;  Recruiting,  exemptions;  After-war  ar- 
rangements, demobilisation  of  war  industries,  restoration  of 
trade  union  conditions,  etc. 

(4.)  Total  Hours  of  Work:  To  discuss  any  proposed  change 
in  the  length  of  the  standard  week.  This  could  only  be  done  by 
the  workers'  committee  of  an  individual  firm,  provided  the 
change  were  zuithin  the  standards  fixed  by  agreement  with  the 
local  union  or  those  customary  in  the  trade. 


APPENDIX  XII  459 

(5.)  New  Processes  or  Change  of  Process  :  Where  the  man- 
agement desire  to  introduce  some  process  which  will  throw  men 
out  of  employment,  the  whole  position  should  be  placed  before 
a  shop  committee  to  let  the  necessity  be  understood,  and  to  al- 
low it  to  discuss  how  the  change  may  be  brought  about  with  the 
least  hardship  to  individuals. 

(6.)  Grades  of  Worker  for  Types  of  Machine:  Due  to  the 
introduction  of  new  types  of  machines,  and  to  the  splitting  up 
of  processes,  with  the  simplification  of  manipulation  sometimes 
entailed  thereby,  the  question  of  the  grade  of  worker  to  be 
employed  on  a  given  type  of  machine  continually  arises.  Many 
such  questions  are  so  general  as  to  be  the  subject  of  trade 
union  negotiation,  but  many  more  are  quite  local  to  particular 
firms.  For  either  kind  there  should  be  a  works  committee  within 
the  works  to  deal  with  their  application  there. 

(b)  Grievances:  The  quick  ventilating  of  grievances  and 
injustices  to  individuals  or  to  classes  of  men,  is  of  the  greatest 
importance  in  securing  good  feeling.  The  provision  of  means 
for  voicing  such  complaints  acts  also  as  a  check  to  petty 
tyranny,  and  is  a  valuable  help  to  the  higher  management  in 
giving  an  insight  into  what  is  going  on. 

A  shop  committee  provides  a  suitable  channel  in  such  cases  as 
the  following : — 

Alleged  petty  tyranny  by  foremen ;  hard  cases  arising  out 
of  too  rigid  application  of  rules,  etc. ;  alleged  mistakes  in  wages 
or  piece  work  payments ;  wrong  dismissal,  e.  g.,  for  alleged  dis- 
obedience, etc.,  etc. 

In  all  cases  of  grievances  or  complaints  it  is  most  important 
that  the  body  bringing  them  should  be  of  sufficient  weight  and 
standing  to  speak  its  mind  freely. 

(c)  General  Shop  Conditions  and  Amenities :  On  all  those 
questions  which  affect  the  community  life  of  the  factory,  the 
fullest  consultation  is  necessary,  and  considerable  self-govern- 
ment is  possible. 

The  following  indicate  the  kind  of  question : — 

(i.)  Shop  Rules:  Restriction  of  smoking;  tidiness,  cleaning 
of  machines,  etc.;  use  of  lavatories  and  cloakrooms;  provision, 
care  and  type  of  overalls;  time-booking  arrangements;  wage- 
paying  arrangements,  etc.,  etc. 

(2.)  Maintenance  of  Discipline:  It  should  be  possible  to 
promote   such   a   spirit   in   a   works   that,   not   only   could   the 


46o  APPENDIX  XII 

workers  have  a  say  in  the  drawing  up  of  Shop  Rules,  but  the 
enforcing  of  them  could  also  be  largely  in  their  hands. 

This  would  be  particularly  desirable  with  regard  to  enforcing 
good  time-keeping;  maintaining  tidiness;  use  of  lavatories  and 
cloakrooms;  promoting  a  high  standard  of  general  behaviour, 
etc.,  etc. 

(3.)  Working  Conditions:  Meal  hours,  starting  and  stop- 
ping times;  arrangements  for  holidays,  etc.;  arrangement  of 
shifts,  night  work,  etc. 

(4.)  Accidents  and  Sickness:  Safety  appliances  and  prac- 
tices; machine  guards,  etc.;  administration  of  First  Aid;  rest 
room   arrangements;    medical   examination   and   advice. 

(5.)  Dining  Service:  Consultation  re  requirements;  criti- 
cisms of  and  suggestions  re  service;  control  of  discipline  and 
behaviour;  seating  arrangements,  etc. 

(6.)  Shop  Comfort  and  Hygiene:  Suggestions  re  tempera- 
ture, ventilation,  washing  accommodation,  drying  clothes,  etc.; 
provision  of  seats  at  work,  where  possible ;  drinking  water  sup- 
ply. 

(7.)  Benevolent  Work:  Shop  collections  for  charities  or 
hard  cases  among  fellow  workers ;  sick  club,  convalescent,  etc. ; 
saving  societies; 

{d)  General  Social  Amenities:  A  works  tends  to  become  a 
centre  of  social  activities  having  no  direct  connection  with  its 
work,  for  example: 

Works  picnics ;  games,  e.  g.,  cricket,  football,  etc. ;  musical  so- 
cieties ;  etc.,  etc. 

These  should  be  all  organised  by  committees  of  the  workers 
and  not  by  the  management. 

2.     Questions  on  Which  Joint  Discussions  Would  Primarily  be 
of  Advantage  to   the  Management 

In  this  group  are  those  questions  with  regard  to  which  there 
is  no  demand  put  forward  by  the  workers,  but  where  dis- 
cussion and  explanation  on  the  part  of  the  management  would 
be  desirable,  and  would  tend  to  ease  some  of  the  difficulties 
of  management.  The  institution  of  works  committees  would 
facilitate  discussion  and  explanation  in  the  following  in- 
stances : — 

(a)  Interpretation  of  Management  to  Workers:  In  any 
case  of  new  rules  or  new  developments,  or  new  workshop  policy, 


APPENDIX  XII  461 

there  is  always  the  greatest  difficulty  in  getting  the  rank  and 
file  to  understand  what  the  management  is  "getting  at."  How- 
ever well-meaning  the  change  may  be  as  regards  the  workers, 
the  mere  fact  that  it  is  new  and  not  understood  is  likely  to  lead 
to  opposition.  If  the  best  use  is  made  of  committees  of  work- 
ers, such  changes,  new  developments,  etc.,  would  have  been  dis- 
cussed, and  explained  to  them,  and  it  is  not  too  much  to  expect 
that  the  members  of  such  committees  would  eventually  spread 
a  more  correct  and  sympathetic  version  of  the  management's 
intentions  among  their  fellow-workers  than  these  could  get  in 
any  other  way. 

(b)  Education  in  Shop  Processes  and  Trade  Technique:  The 
knowledge  of  most  workers  is  limited  to  the  process  with  which 
they  are  concerned,  and  they  would  have  a  truer  sense  of  in- 
dustrial problems  if  they  understood  better  the  general  tech- 
nique of  the  industry  in  which  they  are  concerned,  and  the  re- 
lation of  their  particular  process  to  others  in  the  chain  of  man- 
ufacture from  raw  material  to  finished  article. 

It  is  possible  that  some  of  this  education  should  be  under- 
taken by  technical  schools,  but  their  work  in  this  respect  can 
only  be  of  a  general  nature,  leaving  still  a  field  for  detailed 
teaching  which  could  only  be  undertaken  in  connection  with  an 
individual  firm,  or  a  small  group  of  similar  firms.  Such  educa- 
tion might  well  begin  with  the  members  of  the  committee  of 
workers,  though  if  found  feasible  it  should  not  stop  there,  but 
should  be  made  general  for  the  whole  works.  Any  such  scheme 
should  be  discussed  and  worked  out  in  conjunction  with  a  com- 
mittee of  workers,  in  order  to  obtain  the  best  from  it. 

(c)  Promotion:  It  is  open  to  question  whether  the  filling  of 
any  given  vacancy  could  profitably  be  discussed  between  the 
management  and  the  workers. 

In  connection  with  such  appointments  as  shop  foremen,  where 
the  position  is  filled  by  promoting  a  workman  or  "leading 
hand,"  it  would  at  least  be  advisable  to  announce  the  appoint- 
ment to  the  workers'  committee  before  making  it  generally 
known.  It  might  perhaps  be  possible  to  explain  why  a  particu- 
lar choice  had  been  made.  This  would  be  indicated  fairly  well 
by  a  statement  of  the  qualities  which  the  management  deemed 
necessary  for  such  a  post,  thereby  tending  to  head  off  some 
of  the  jealous  disappointment  always  involved  in  such  promo- 
tions, especially  where  the  next  in  seniority  is  not  taken. 

It  has  of  course  been  urged,  generally  by  extremists,  that 


462  APPENDIX  XII 

workmen  should  choose  their  own  foremen  by  election,  but  this 
is  not  considered  practical  politics  at  present,  though  it  may 
become  possible  and  desirable  when  workers  have  had  more 
practice  in  the  exercise  of  self-management  to  the  limited  de- 
gree here  proposed. 

One  of  the  difficulties  involved  in  any  general  discussion  of 
promotions  is  the  fact  that  there  are  so  many  parties  con- 
cerned, and  all  from  a  different  point  of  view.  For  example,  in 
the  appointment  of  a  foreman,  the  workers  are  concerned  as 
to  how  far  the  new  man  is  sympathetic  and  helpful,  and  inspir- 
ing to  work  for.  The  other  foremen  are  concerned  with  how- 
far  he  is  their  equal  in  education  and  technical  attainments, 
social  standing,  length  of  service,  i.e.,  as  to  whether  he  would 
make  a  good  colleague.  The  manager  is  concerned,  among  other 
qualities,  with  his  energy,  loyalty  to  the  firm,  and  ability  to 
-maintain  discipline.  Each  of  these  three  parties  is  looking  for 
three  different  sets  of  qualities,  and  it  is  not  often  that  a  can- 
didate can  be  found  to  satisfy  all.  Whose  views  then  should 
carry  most  weight — the  men's,  the  other  foremen's,  or  the 
manager's  ? 

It  is  quite  certain,  however,  that  it  is  well  worth  while  mak- 
ing some  attempt  to  secure  popular  understanding  and  ap- 
proval of  appointments  made,  and  a  workers'  committee  offers 
the  best  opportunity  for  this. 

It  would  be  possible  to  discuss  a  vacancy  occurring  in  any 
grade  with  all  the  others  in  that  grade.  For  example,  to  dis- 
cuss with  all  shop  foremen  the  possible  candidates  to  fill  a 
■vacancy  among  the  foremen.  This  is  probably  better  than  no 
discussion  at  all,  and  the  foremen  might  be  expected,  to  some 
extent,  to  reflect  the  feeling  among  their  men.  Here  again, 
the  establishing  of  any  such  scheme  might  well  be  discussed 
with  the  committee  of  workers. 

(d)  Education  in  General  Business  Questions:  This  point 
is  still  more  doubtful  than  the  preceding.  Employers  continu- 
ally complain  that  the  workers  do  not  understand  the  responsi- 
bilities and  the  risks  which  they,  as  employers,  have  to  carry, 
and  it  would  seem  desirable  therefore  to  take  some  steps  to 
enable  them  to  do  so.  In  some  directions  this  would  be  quite 
feasible,  e.g.: 

(i.)  The  reasons  should  be  explained  and  discussed  for  the 
establishment  of  new  works  departments,  or  the  re-organisation 


APPENDIX  XII  463 

of  existing  ones,  the  relation  of  the  new  arrangement  to  the  gen- 
eral manufacturing  policy  being  demonstrated. 

(2.)  Some  kind  of  simplified  works  statistics  might  be  laid 
before  a  committee  of  workers.  For  example :  Output ;  cost  of 
new  equipment  installed;  cost  of  tools  used  in  given  period; 
cost  of  raw  material  consumed;  number  employed;  amount  of 
bad  work  produced. 

(3.)  Reports  of  activities  of  other  part  of  the  business  might 
be  laid  before  them. 

(a)  From  the  commercial  side,  showing  the  difficulties  to  be 
met,  the  general  attitude  of  customers  to  the  firm,  etc. 

(b)  By  the  chief  technical  departments,  design  office,  labora- 
tory, etc.,  as  to  the  general  technical  developments  or  difficulties 
that  were  being  dealt  with.  Much  of  such  work  need  not  be 
kept  secret,  and  would  tend  to  show  the  workers  that  other  fac- 
tors enter  into  the  production  of  economic  wealth  besides  man- 
ual labour. 

(4.)  Simple  business  reports,  showing  general  trade  prospects, 
might  be  presented.  There  are  perhaps  most  difficult  to  give 
in  any  intelligible  form,  without  publishing  matter  which  every 
management  would  object  to  showing.  Still,  the  attempt  would 
be  well  worth  making,  and  would  show  the  workers  how  narrow 
is  the  margin  between  financial  success  and  failure  on  which 
most  manufacturing  business  works.  Such  statistics  might,  per- 
haps, be  expressed  not  in  actual  amounts,  but  as  proportions  of 
the  wage  bill  for  the  same  period. 

2.      TYPES   OF   ORGANISATION 

Having  dealt  in  the  previous  section  with  the  kinds  of  ques- 
tions, which,  judged  simply  by  their  nature,  would  admit  of 
joint  discussion  or  handling,  it  is  now  necessary  to  consider 
what  changes  are  needed  in  the  structure  of  business  manage- 
ment to  carry  out  such  proposals.  The  development  of  the 
necessary  machinery  presents  very  considerable  difficulties  on 
account  of  the  slowness  of  action  and  lack  of  executive  preci- 
sion which  almost  necessarily  accompany  democratic  organisa- 
tion, and  which  it  is  the  express  object  of  most  business 
organisations  to  avoid. 

The  question  of  machinery  for  joint  discussion  and  action 
is  considered  in  this  section  in  three  aspects: — 

The   requirements  which   such  machinery  must  satisfy;  the 


464  APPENDIX  XII 

influence  of  various  industrial  conditions  on  the  type  of  ma- 
chinery likely  to  be  adopted  in  particular  trades  or  works ;  some 
detailed  suggestions  of  shop  committees  of  carrying  scope. 

(/.)     Requirements  to  Be  Satisfied 

(a)  Keeping  in  Touch  with  the  Trade  Unions:  It  is  obvious 
that  no  works  committee  can  be  a  substitute  for  the  trade  union, 
and  no  attempt  must  be  made  by  the  employer  to  use  it  in  this 
way.  To  allay  any  trade  union  suspicion  that  this  is  the  in- 
tention, and  to  ensure  that  the  shop  committee  links  up  with  the 
trade  union  organisation,  it  would  be  advisable  to  see  that  the 
trade  union  is  represented  in  some  fairly  direct  manner.  This 
is  specially  important  for  any  committee  dealing  with  wages, 
piece  work  and  such  other  working  conditions  as  are  the  usual 
subject  of  trade  union  action. 

In  the  other  direction,  it  will  be  necessary  for  the  trade 
unionists  to  develop  some  means  of  working  shop  committees 
into  their  scheme  of  organisation,  otherwise  there  will  be  the 
danger  of  a  works  committee,  able  to  act  more  quickly  through 
being  on  the  spot,  usurping  the  place  of  the  local  district  com- 
mittee of  the  trade  unions. 

(b)  Representation  of  all  Grades:  The  desirability  of  hav- 
ing all  grades  of  workers  represented  on  works  committees  is 
obvious,  but  it  is  not  always  easy  to  carry  out  owing  to  the 
complexity  of  the  distribution  of  labour  in  most  works.  Thus, 
it  is  quite  common  for  a  single  department,  say  in  an  engineer- 
ing works,  to  contain  several  grades  of  workers,  from  skilled 
tradesmen  to  labourers,  and  possibly  women.  These  grades 
will  belong  to  different  unions,  and  there  may  even  be  dif- 
ferent, and  perhaps  competing,  unions  represented  in  the  same 
grade.    Many  of  the  workers  also  will  not  be  in  any  union  at  all. 

(c)  Touch  with  Management:  As  a  large  part  of  the  aim  of 
the  whole  development  is  to  give  the  workers  some  sense  of 
management  problems  and  point  of  view,  it  is  most  desirable 
that  meetings  between  works  committees  and  management 
should  be  frequent  and  regular,  and  not  looked  on  merely  as 
means  of  investing  grievances  or  deadlocks  when  they  arise. 
The  works  committee  must  not  be  accidental  excrescence  on 
the  management  structure,  but  must  be  worked  into  it  so  as 
to  become  an  integral  part,  with  real  and  necessary  functions. 

(d)  Rapidity  of  Action:  Delays  in  negotiations  between  em- 


APPENDIX  XII  465 

ployers  and  labour  are  a  constant  source  of  irritation  to  the 
latter.  Every  effort  should  be  made  to  reduce  them.  Where 
this  is  impossible,  due  to  the  complication  of  the  questions  in- 
volved, the  works  committee  should  be  given  enough  informa- 
tion to  convince  it  of  this,  and  that  the  delay  is  not  a  deliberate 
attempt  to  shirk  the  issue. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  desire  to  attain  rapidity  of  action 
should  not  lead  to  haphazard  and  "scratch"  discussions  or 
negotiations.  These  will  only  result  in  confusion,  owing  to 
the  likelihood  that  some  of  those  who  ought  to  take  part  or 
be  consulted  over  each  question  will  be  left  out,  or  have  in- 
sufficient opportunity  for  weighing  up  the  matter.  The  pro- 
cedure for  working  with  or  through  works  committees  must, 
therefore,  be  definite  and  constitutional,  so  that,  every  one 
knows  how  to  get  a  grievance  or  suggestion  put  forward  for 
consideration,  and  every  one  concerned  will  be  sure  of  receiving 
due  notice  of  the  matter. 

The  procedure  must  not  be  so  rigid,  however,  as  to  pre- 
clude emergency  negotiations  to  deal  with  sudden  crises. 

{2.)     Influence  of  Various  Industrial  Conditions  on  the  Type 
of  Organisation  of  Shop  Committees 

There  is  no  Due  type  of  shop  committee  that  will  suit  all  con- 
ditions. Some  industries  can  develop  more  easily  in  one  di- 
rection and  some  in  another,  and  in  the  sub-section  are  pointed 
out  some  of  the  conditions  which  are  likely  to  influence  this. 

(a)  Type  of  Labour:  The  constitution  of  works  committees, 
or  the  scheme  of  committees,  which  will  suitably  represent  the 
workers  of  any  particular  factory,  will  depend  very  largely  on 
the  extent  to  which  different  trades  and  different  grades  of 
workers  are  involved. 

In  the  simplest  kind  of  works,  where  only  one  trade  or 
craft  is  carried  out,  the  workers,  even  though  of  different  de- 
grees of  skill,  would  probably  all  be  eligible  for  the  same 
trade  union.  In  such  a  case  a  purely  trade  union  organisation, 
but  based  of  course  on  works  departments,  would  meet  most 
of  the  requirements,  and  would  probably,  in  fact,  be  already 
in  existence. 

In  many  works,  however,  at  least  in  the  engineering  in- 
dustry, a  number  of  different  "trades"  are  carried  on.  For 
instance,    turning,    automatic    machine    operating,    blacksmith- 


466  APPENDIX  XII 

ing,  pattern-making,  foundry  work,  etc.  Many  of  these  trades 
are  represented  by  the  same  trade  union,  though  the  interests 
of  the  various  sections  are  often  antagonistic,  e.g.,  in  the  case 
of  turners  and  automatic  machine  operators.  Some  of  the 
other  trades  mentioned  belong  to  different  unions  aUogether.  In 
addition  to  these  "tradesmen,"  will  be  found  semi-skilled  and 
unskilled  labourers.  For  the  most  part  these  will  belong  to  no 
union,  though  a  few  may  belong  to  labouring  unions  which,  how- 
ever, have  no  special  connection  with  the  engineering  unions. 
In  addition  to  all  these,  there  may  be  women  whose  position 
in  relation  to  men's  unions  is  still  uncertain,  and  some  of  whose 
interests  will  certainly  be  opposed  to  those  of  some  of  the  men. 
The  best  way  of  representing  all  these  different  groups  will 
depend  on  their  relative  proportion  and  distribution  in  any 
given  works.  Where  women  are  employed  in  any  considerable 
numbers  it  will  probably  be  advisable  for  them  to  be  repre- 
sented independently  of  the  men.  For  the  rest  it  will  prob- 
ably be  necessary  to  have  at  least  two  kinds  of  works  commit- 
tees :  one  representing  trade  unionists  as  such,  chosen  for  con- 
venience by  departments,  the  other  representing  simply 
works  departments.  The  first  would  deal  with  wages  and 
the  type  of  question  usually  forming  the  subject  of  discussion 
between  employers  and  trade  unions.  The  other  would  deal 
with  all  other  workshop  conditions.  The  first,  being  based^ 
on  trade  unions,  would  automatically  take  account  of  dis- 
tinctions between  different  trades  and  different  grades,  whereas 
the  second  would  be  dealing  with  those  questions  in  which 
such  distinctions  do  not  matter  very  much. 

(b)  Stability  and  Regularity  of  Employment:  Where  work 
is  of  an  irregular  or  seasonal  nature  and  workers  are  con- 
stantly being  taken  on  and  turned  off,  only  the  very  simplest 
kind  of  committee  of  workers  would  be  possible.  In  such  in- 
dustries probably  nothing  but  a  trade  union  organisation  with- 
in the  works  would  be  possible.  This  would  draw  its  strength 
from  the  existence  of  the  trade  union  outside,  which  would,  of 
course,  be  largely  independent  of  trade  fluctuations,  and  would 
be  able  to  reconstitute  the  works  committee  as  often  as  neces- 
sary, thus  keeping  it  in  existence,  even  should  most  of  the 
previous  members  have  been  discharged  through  slackness. 

(c)  Elaboration  of  Management  Organisation:  The  extent 
to  which  management  functions  can  be  delegated,  or  manage- 
ment questions  and  policy  be  discussed  with  the  workers  de- 


APPENDIX  XII  467 

pends  very  largely  on  the  degree  of  completeness  with  which 
the  management  itself  is  organised.  Where  this  is  haphazard 
and  management  consists  of  a  succession  of  emergencies,  only 
autocratic  control  is  possible,  being  the  only  method  which 
is  quick-acting  and  mobile  enough.  Therefore,  the  better 
organised  and  more  constitutional  (in  the  sense  of  having 
known  rules  and  procedures)  the  management  is,  the  more  pos- 
sible is  it  for  policy  to  be  discussed  with  the  workers. 

(5.)     Sotne  Schemes  Suggested 

The  following  suggestions  for  shop  organisations  of  workers 
are  intended  to  form  one  scheme.  Their  individual  value, 
however,  does  not  depend  on  the  adoption  of  the  scheme  as  a 
whole,  each  being  good  as  far  as  it  goes. 

(a)  Shop  Stewards  Committee:  As  pointed  out  in  the  last 
sub-section,  in  a  factory  where  the  trade  union  is  strong,  there 
will  probably  be  a  shop  stewards  or  trade  union  committee  al- 
ready in  existence.  This  is,  of  course,  a  committee  of  workers 
only,  elected  generally  by  the  trade  union  members  in  the 
works,  to  look  after  their  interests  and  to  conduct  negotia- 
tions for  them  with  the  management.  Sometirnes  the  stewards 
carry  out  other  purely  trade  union  work,  such  as  collecting 
subscriptions,  obtaining  new  members,  explaining  union  rules, 
etc.  Such  a  committee  is  the  most  obvious  and  simplest  type  of 
works  committee,  and  where  the  composition  of  the  shop  is 
simple,  i.e.,  mainly  one  trade,  with  no  very  great  differences  in 
grade,  a  shop  stewards  committee  could  deal  with  many  of  the 
questions  laid  down  as  suitable  for  joint  handling. 

It  is  doubtful,  however,  whether  a  shop  stewards  committee 
can,  or  should,  cover  the  full  range  of  workers'  activities,  ex- 
cept in  the  very  simplest  type  of  works.  The  mere  fact  that,  as 
a  purely  trade  union  organisation,  it  will  deal  primarily  with 
wages  and  piece-work  questions,  will  tend  to  introduce  an  at- 
mosphere of  bargaining,  which  would  make  the  discussion  of 
more  general  questions  very  difficult.  Further,  such  a  com- 
mittee would  be  likely  to  consider  very  little  else  than  the  in- 
terests of  the  trade  union,  or  of  themselves  as  trade  unionists. 
While  this  is  no  doubt  quite  legitimate  as  regards  such  ques- 
tions as  wages,  the  more  general  questions  of  work-shop  ameni- 
ties should  be  considered  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  works 
as  a  community  in  which  the  workers  have  common  interests 


468  APPENDIX  Xll 

with  the  management  in  finding  and  maintaining  the  best  con- 
ditions possible.  Moreover,  in  many  shops,  where  workers  of 
widely  differing  grades  and  trades  are  employed,  a  shop  stew- 
ards committee  is  not  likely  to  represent  truly  the  whole  of  the 
workers,  but  only  the  better  organised  sections. 

The  shop  stewards  committee,  in  the  engineering  trade  at 
least,  is  fairly  certain  to  constitute  itself  without  any  help  from 
the  management.  The  management  should  hasten  to  recognise 
it,  and  give  it  every  facility  for  carrying  on  its  business,  and 
should  endeavour  to  give  it  a  recognised  status  and  to  impress 
it  with  a  sense  of  responsibility. 

It  would  probably  be  desirable  that  shop  stewards  should  be 
elected  by  secret  ballot  rather  than  by  show  of  hands  in 
open  meeting,  in  order  that  the  most  responsible  men  may  be 
chosen,  and  not  merely  the  loudest  talkers  or  the  most  popu- 
lar. It  seems  better,  also,  that  stewards  should  be  elected 
for  a  certain  definite  term,  instead  of  holding  office,  as  is  some- 
times the  case  now,  until  they  resign,  leave  the  firm,  or  are 
actually  deposed.  The  shop  stewards  committee,  being  primarily 
a  workers'  and  trade  union  affair,  both  these  points  are  outside 
the  legitimate  field  of  action  of  the  management.  The  lat- 
ter's  willingness  to  recognise  and  work  through  the  commit- 
tee should,  however,  confer  some  right  to  make  suggestions 
even  in  such  matters  as  these. 

The  facilities  granted  by  the  management  might  very  well 
include  a  room  on  the  works  premises  in  which  to  hold  meetings, 
and  a  place  to  keep  papers,  etc.  If  works  conditions  make  it 
difficult  for  the  stewards  to  meet  out  of  work  hours,  it  would 
be  well  to  allow  them  to  hold  committee  meetings  in  working 
hours  at  recognised  times.  The  management  should  also 
arrange  periodic  joint  meetings  with  the  committee,  to  enable 
both  sides  to  bring  forward  matters  of  discussion. 

The  composition  of  the  joint  meeting  between  the  commit- 
tee of  shop  stewards  and  the  management  is  worth  considering 
shortly.  In  the  conception  here  set  forth  the  shop  stewards 
committee  is  a  complete  entity  by  itself;  it  is  not  merely  the 
workers'  section  of  some  larger  composite  committee  of  man- 
agement and  workers.  The  joint  meetings  are  rather  in  the 
nature  of  a  standing  arrangement  on  the  part  of  the  manage- 
ment for  receiving  deputations  from  the  workers.  For  this  pur- 
pose the  personnel  of  the  management  section  need  not  be  fixed, 
but  could  well  be  varied  according  to  the  subjects  to  be  dis- 


APPENDIX  XII  469 

cussed.  It  should  always  include,  however,  the  highest  execu- 
tive authority  concerned  with  the  works.  For  the  rest,  there 
might  be  the  various  departmental  managers,  and,  sometimes, 
some  of  the  foremen.  As  the  joint  meeting  is  not  an  instru- 
ment of  management,  taking  decisions  by  vote,  the  number  of 
the  management  contingent  does  not  really  matter,  beyond  as- 
suring that  all  useful  points  of  view  are  represented. 

Too  much  importance  can  hardly  be  laid  on  the  desirability 
of  regular  joint  meetings,  as  against  ad  hoc  meetings  called 
to  discuss  special  grievances.  According  to  the  first  plan,  each 
side  becomes  used  to  meeting  the  other  in  the  ordinary  way  of 
business,  say  once  a  month,  when  no  special  issue  is  at  stake, 
and  no  special  tension  is  in  the  air.  Each  can  hardly  fail  to  ab- 
sorb something  of  the  other's  point  of  view.  At  a  special  ad 
hoc  meeting,  on  the  other  hand,  each  side  is  apt  to  regard  as  its 
business,  not  the  discussion  of  a  question  on  its  merits,  but 
simply  the  making  out  of  a  case.  And  the  fact  that  a  meeting 
is  called  specially  means  that  expectations  of  results  are 
raised  among  the  other  workers,  which  make  it  difficult  to  al- 
low the  necessary  time  or  number  of  meetings  for  the  proper 
discussion  of  a  complicated  question. 

Where  women  are  employed  in  considerable  numbers  along 
with  men,  the  question  of  their  representation  by  stewards 
becomes  important.  It  is  as  yet  too  early  to  say  how  this 
situation  can  best  be  met.  If  they  are  eligible  for  member- 
ship of  the  same  trades  unions  as  the  men,  the  shop  stewards 
committee  might  consist  of  representatives  of  both.  But,  con- 
sidering the  situation  which  will  arise  after  the  war,  when  the 
interests  of  the  men  and  of  the  women  will  often  be  opposed, 
this  solution  does  not  seem  very  promising  at  present. 

Another  plan  would  be  for  a  separate  women's  shop  stew- 
ards committee  to  be  formed,  which  would  also  meet  the 
management  periodically  and  be,  in  fact,  a  duplicate  of  the 
men's  organisation.  It  would  probably  also  hold  periodic  joint 
meetings  with  the  men's  committee,  to  unify  their  policies  as  far 
as  possible.  This  plan  is  somewhat  cumbersome,  but  seems  to 
be  the  only  one  feasible  at  present  on  account  of  the  divergence 
of  interest  and  the  very  different  stage  of  development  in  or- 
ganisation of  men  and  women. 

(b)  Social  Union:  Some  organisation  for  looking  after 
recreation  is  in  existence  in  many  works,  and  if  not,  there  is 


470  APPENDIX  XII      - 

much  to  be  said  for  the  institution  of  such  a  body  as  the  social 
union  here  described. 

Although  the  purpose  which  calls  together  the  members  of 
a  works  community  is,  of  course,  not  the  fostering  of  social 
life  and  amenities,  there  is  no  doubt  that  members  of  such 
communities  do  attain  a  fuller  life  and  more  satisfaction  from 
their  association  together,  when  common  recreation  is  added  to 
common  work.  It  may,  of  course,  be  urged  against  such  a 
development  of  community  life  in  industry,  that  it  is  better  for 
people  to  get  away  from  their  work  and  to  meet  quite  another 
set  in  their  leisure  times.  This  is  no  doubt  true  enough,  but 
the  number  of  people  who  take  advantage  of  it  is  probably  very 
much  less  than  would  be  affected  by  social  activities  connected 
with  the  works.  The  development  of  such  activities  will,  in  con- 
sequence, almost  certainly  have  more  effect  in  spreading  op- 
portunities for  fuller  life  than  it  will  have  in  restricting  them. 
Moreover,  if  the  works  is  a  large  one,  the  differences  in  out- 
look between  the  various  sections  are  perhaps  quite  as  great 
as  can  be  met  with  outside.  For  this  reason  the  cardinal 
principle  for  such  organisations  is  to  mix  up  the  different  sec- 
tions and  grades,  especially  the  works  and  the  office  depart- 
ments. 

The  sphere  of  the  social  union  includes  all  activities  other 
than  those  affecting  the  work  for  which  the  firm  is  organised. 
This  sphere  being  outside  the  work  of  the  firm,  the  organisa- 
tion should  be  entirely  voluntary  and  in  the  hands  of  the 
workers,  though  the  management  may  well  provide  facilities 
such  as  rooms  and  playing  fields. 

Two  main  schemes  of  organisation  are  usual.  In  the  first  a 
general  council  is  elected  by  the  members,  or,  if  possible, 
by  all  the  employes,  irrespective  of  department  or  grade.  This 
council  is  responsible  for  the  general  policy  of  the  social  union, 
holds  the  funds,  and  undertakes  the  starting  and  supervising 
of  smaller  organisations  for  specific  purposes.  Thus,  for  each 
activity  a  club  or  society  would  be  formed  under  the  auspices 
of  the  council.  The  clubs  would  manage  their  own  affairs 
and  make  their  own  detail  arrangements. 

It  is  most  desirable  that  the  social  union  should  be  self- 
supporting  as  far  as  running  expenses  go,  and  should  not  be 
subsidised  by  the  management,  as  is  sometimes  done.  A  small 
subscription  should  be  paid  weekly  by  every  member,  such 
subscription  admitting  them  to  any  or  all  clubs.     The  funds 


APPENDIX  XII  471 

should  be  held  by  the  council,  and  spent  according  to  the  needs 
of  the  various  clubs,  not  according  to  the  subscriptions  traceable 
to  the  membership  of  each.  This  is  very  much  better  than  mak- 
ing the  finances  of  each  club  self-supporting,  since  it  em- 
phasises the  "community"  feeling,  is  very  simple,  and  enables 
some  forms  of  recreation  to  be  carried  on  which  could  not  pos- 
sibly be  made  to  pay  for  themselves 

The  second  general  type  of  social  union  organisation  involves 
making  the  clubs  themselves  the  basis.  Each  levies  its  own 
subscriptions  and  pays  its  own  expenses,  and  the  secretaries  of 
the  clubs  form  a  council  for  general  management.  This  is  a 
less  desirable  arrangement  because  each  member  of  the  council 
is  apt  to  regard  himself  as  there  only  to  look  after  the  interests 
of  his  club,  rather  than  the  whole.  The  starting  of  new  ac- 
tivities is  also  less  easy  than  under  the  first  scheme. 

(c)  Welfare  Committee:  The  two  organisations  suggested 
so  far,  viz.,  shop  stewards  committee  and  social  union,  do  not 
cover  the  whole  range  of  functions  outlined  in  Section  I.  In 
considering  how  much  of  that  field  still  remains  to  be  covered, 
it  is  simplest  first  to  mark  off,  mentally,  the  sphere  of  the  social 
union,  vis.,  social  activities  outside  working  hours.  This  leaves 
clear  the  real  problem,  vis.,  all  the  questions  affecting  the  work 
and  the  conditions  of  work  of  the  firm.  These  are  then  con- 
ceived as  falling  into  two  groups.  First  there  are  those  ques- 
tions in  which  the  interests  of  the  workers  may  be  opposed  to 
those  of  the  employer.  These  are  concerned  with  such  mat- 
ters as  wage  and  piece  rates,  penalties  for  spoiled  work,  etc. 
With  regard  to  these  discussion  is  bound  to  be  of  the  nature  of 
bargaining,  and  these  are  the  field  for  the  shop  stewards  com- 
mittee, negotiating  by  means  of  the  periodical  joint  meetings 
with  the  management. 

There  remains,  however,  a  second  class  of  question,  in  which 
there  is  no  clash  of  interest  between  employer  and  employed. 
These  are  concerned  mainly  with  regulating  the  "community 
life"  of  the  works,  and  include  all  questions  of  general  shop 
conditions  and  amenities,  and  the  more  purely  educational  mat- 
ters. For  dealing  with  this  group  a  composite  committee  of 
management  and  workers,  here  called  the  Welfare  Committee, 
is  suggested. 

This  would  consist  of  two  parts:  Representatives  elected  by 
workers,  and  nominees  of  the  management. 

The  elected  side  might  well  represent  the  offices,  both  tech- 


472  APPENDIX  XII 

nical  and  clerical,  as  well  as  the  works,  and  members  would 
be  elected  by  departments,  no  account  being  taken  of  the 
various  grades.  Where  women  are  employed  it  would  prob- 
ably be  desirable  for  them  to  elect  separate  representatives.  If 
they  are  in  departments  by  themselves,  this  would  naturally 
happen.  If  the  departments  are  mixed,  the  men  and  women 
of  such  departments  would  each  send  representatives. 

The  trade  union  or  unions  most  concerned  with  the  work 
of  the  firm  should  be  represented  in  some  fairly  direct  way. 
This  might  be  done  in  either  of  two  ways:  first,  if  a  shop 
stewards  committee  exists,  it  might  be  asked  to  send  one  or 
more  representatives ;  second,  or  each  of  the  main  trade  unions 
represented  in  the  works  might  elect  one  or  more  representa- 
tives to  represent  their  members  as  trade  unionists. 

The  management  section  should  contain,  in  general,  the 
highest  members  of  the  management  who  concern  themselves 
with  the  running  of  the  works;  it  would  be  no  use  to  have 
here  men  in  subordinate  positions,  as  much  of  the  discussion 
would  deal  with  matters  beyond  their  jurisdiction.  More- 
over, the  opportunity  for  the  higher  management  to  get  into 
touch  with  the  workers  would  be  too  important  to  miss.  It 
is  doubtful  whether  there  is  any  need  for  the  workers'  sec- 
tion of  the  welfare  committee  to  meet  separately,  though  there 
is  no  objection  to  this  if  thought  desirable.  In  any  case  a 
good  many  questions  can  be  handed  over  by  the  joint  meeting 
to  sub-committees  for  working  out,  and  such  sub-committees 
can,  where  desirable,  consist  entirely  of  workers. 

It  may  be  urged  that  the  welfare  committee  is  an  unneces- 
sary complication,  and,  either  that  its  work  could  be  carried 
out  by  the  shop  stewards  committee  or  that  the  work  of  both 
could  be  handled  by  a  single  composite  shop  committee  of 
management  and  workers.  In  practice,  however,  a  committee 
of  the  workers  sitting  separately  to  consider  those  interests  that 
are,  or  appear  to  be,  opposed,  with  regular  deputations  to  the 
management,  and  a  composite  committee  of  workers  and  man- 
agement sitting  together  to  discuss  identical  interests  would 
seem  the  best  solution  of  a  difficult  problem. 

Everything  considered,  therefore,  there  seems,  in  many 
works  at  least,  to  be  a  good  case  for  the  institution  of  both 
organisations,  that  of  the  shop  stewards  and  that  of  the  welfare 
committee.  The  conditions  making  the  latter  desirable  and 
possible  would  seem  to  be:— 


APPENDIX  XII  473 

(i.)  A  management  sufficiently  methodical  and  constitutional 
to  make  previous  discussion  of  developments  feasible. 

(2.)     The  conditions  of  employment  fairly  stable. 

(3.)  The  trades  and  grades  included  in  the  shop  so  varied 
and  intermixed  as  to  make  representation  by  a  committee  of 
trade  union  shop  stewards  incomplete. 

3.      SUMMARY  AND  CONCLUSIONS  OF  SECTIONS   I  AND  2 

Gathering  together  the  views  and  suggestions  made  in  the 
foregoing  pages,  it  is  felt  that  three  separate  organisations 
within  the  works  are  necessary  to  represent  the  workers  in 
the  highly  developed  and  elaborate  organisms  which  modern 
factories  tend  to  become. 

It  is  not  sufficient  criticism  of  such  a  proposal  to  say  that 
it  is  too  complicated.  Modern  industry  is  complicated  and  the 
attempt  to  introduce  democratic  ideas  into  its  governance  will 
necessarily  make  it  more  so.  As  already  pointed  out,  th^ 
scheme  need  not  be  accepted  in  its  entirety.  For  any  trade  or 
firm  fortunate  enough  to  operate  under  simpler  conditions  than 
those  here  assumed,  only  such  of  the  suggestions  need  be 
accepted  as  suit  its  case. 

The  scope  of  the  three  committees  is  shown  by  the  follow- 
ing summary: 

(a)  Shop  Stewards  Committee 

Sphere.  Controversial  questions  where  interests  of  employer 
and  worker  are  apparently  opposed. 

Constitution.  Consists  of  trade  unionist  workers  elected  by 
works  departments.  Sits  by  itself,  but  has  regular  meetings 
with  the  management. 

Examples  of  Questions  Dealt  With  :  Wage  and  piece 
rates ;  The  carrying  out  of  trade  union  agreements ;  Negotiations 
re  application  of  legislation  to  the  workers  represented,  e.  g., 
dilution,  exemption  from  recruiting;  The  carrying  out  of  na- 
tional agreements  re  restoration  of  trade  union  conditions,  de- 
mobilisation of  war  industries,  etc. ;  Introduction  of  new  proc- 
esses; Ventilation  of  grievances  re  any  of  above;  etc.,  etc. 

(&)   Welfare  Committee 

Sphere.  "Community"  questions,  where  there  is  no  clash 
between  interests  of  employer  and  worker. 


474  APPENDIX  XII 

Constitution.  Composite  committee  of  management  and 
workers,  with  some  direct  representation  of  trade  unions.  Sits 
as  one  body,  with  some  questions  relegated  to  sub-committees, 
consisting  either  wholly  of  workers  or  of  workers  and  manage- 
ment, according  to  the  nature  of  the  case. 

Examples  of  Questions  Dealt  With:  Shop  rules;  Such 
working  conditions  as  starting  and  stopping  times,  meal  hours, 
night  shift  arrangements,  etc. ;  Accident  and  sickness  arrange- 
ments; Shop  comfort  and  hygiene;  Benevolent  work  such  as 
collections  for  charities,  hard  cases  of  illness  or  accident  among 
the  workers;  Education  schemes;  Trade  technique;  New  works 
developments;  Statistics  of  works  activity;  Business  outlook; 
Promotions — explanation  and,  if  possible,  consultation;  Ven- 
tilation of  grievances  re  any  of  above. 

(c)  Social  Union 

Sphere.     Social  amenities,  mainly  outside  working  hours. 

Constitution.  Includes  any  or  all  grades  of  management 
and  workers.  Governing  body  elected  by  members  irrespec- 
tive of  trade,  grade,  or  sex. 

Examples  of  Activities:  Institution  of  clubs  for  sports — 
cricket,  football,  swimming,  etc.  Recreative  societies — orches- 
tral, choral,  debating,  etc.  Arranging  social  events — picnics, 
dances,  etc.  Provision  of  games,  library,  etc.,  for  use  in  meal 
hours.    Administration  of  club  rooms. 

4.    comments  on  working 

An  attempt  to  institute  a  scheme  of  shop  committees  on 
the  general  lines  of  those  here  described  revealed  certain  dif- 
ficulties, of  which  the  following  are  instances : 

If  a  works  committee  is  to  deal  with  the  actual  conditions 
under  which  work  is  carried  on,  and  if  its  work  is  to  be  real, 
there  is  every  possibility  of  friction  arising,  due  to  the  com- 
mittee infringing  the  sphere  of  authority  of  the  shop  foremen. 
Not  only  will  specific  complaints  and  objections  regarding 
actions  or  decisions  of  foremen  be  brought  up,  but  more 
general  questions  of  shop  management  will  be  discussed,  on 
which  the  foremen  would  naturally  expect  to  be  consulted 
previously  to  their  men.  Some  of  these  difficulties  would  be 
lessened  if  the  foremen  were  members  of  the  works  commit- 
tees, but  this  seems  hardly  possible,  except  in  very  small  works. 


APPENDIX  XII  475 

It  must  never  be  forgotten  that  the  foremen  have  definite 
management  functions  to  perform  which  cannot  be  discharged 
if  their  authority  is  continually  called  in  question,  or  if  they 
are  continually  harassed  by  complaints  behind  their  backs. 
Nor  can  they  have  any  prestige  if  arrangements  or  rules 
affecting  their  control  or  method  of  management  are  made 
without  them  having  their  full  share  in  the  discussion  of 
them.  The  difficulty  arises,  therefore,  how  on  the  one  hand 
to  maintain  the  foremen's  position  as  a  real  link  in  the  chain 
of  executive  authority,  and  on  the  other  hand  to  promote 
direct  discussion  between  the  workers  and  the  higher  manage- 
ment. The  solving  of  this  difficulty  depends  to  some  extent 
at  least  on  the  devising  of  suitable  procedure  and  machinery 
for  keeping  all  grades  of  management  in  touch  with  each  other, 
and  for  confining  the  activities  of  the  works  committees  to 
fairly  definite  and  known  spheres. 

The  exact  nature  of  this  machinery  would  depend  on  the 
organisation  of  each  particular  firm.  It  will,  in  general,  be 
advisable  to  lay  down  that  previous  notice  shall  be  given  of 
all  subjects  to  be  brought  up  at  a  works  committee  meeting, 
so  that  a  full  agenda  may  be  prepared.  This  agenda  should 
then  be  circulated  freely  among  the  shop  foremen  and  other 
grades  of  management,  so  that  they  may  know  what  is  going 
forward.  Full  minutes  of  the  proceedings  of  all  meetings 
should  be  kept,  and  these  again  should  be  circulated  to  all 
grades  of  management. 

To  facilitate  such  arrangements  it  may  be  advisable  for 
the  management  to  provide  a  secretary  whose  duties  would 
be  twofold — the  preparation  of  the  agenda  and  the  writing 
out  and  following  up  of  the  minutes.  In  making  out  the 
agenda  the  secretary  should  make  full  enquiries  with  regard 
to  all  subjects  brought  forward  by  workers,  and  should  prepare 
a  short  statement  of  each  case  to  issue  with  the  agenda.  The 
secretary  in  circulating  the  agenda  would  then  be  able  to 
learn,  from  the  foremen  and  others,  to  what  extent  each  was 
interested  or  concerned  in  any  particular  item.  Those  specially 
concerned  might  then  be  invited  to  attend  the  meeting  to 
take  part  in  the  discussion.  If  a  foreman  intimated  that 
he  had  decided  views  on  some  subject  and  wished  them  to  be 
taken  into  account,  discussion  at  the  meeting  should  be  of 
preliminary  nature  only  and  limited  to  eliciting  the  full  case  as 
seen  by  the  workers.     Further  discussion  with  the  committee 


476  APPENDIX  XII 

would  be  reserved  until  the  management  had  had  time  to 
consult  the  foremen  or  others  concerned. 

The  certainty  on  the  part  of  all  grades  of  management  that 
no  subject  would  be  discussed  of  which  they  had  not  had  no- 
tice; the  privilege  of  having  final  discussion  of  any  subject 
postponed,  pending  the  statement  of  their  views;  and  finally 
the  circulation  of  all  minutes  showing  what  took  place  at  the 
meetings,  should  go  a  long  way  to  making  the  works  commit- 
tees run  smoothly. 

For  any  recognised  works  committees  the  management  should 
see  that  they  have  such  facilities  put  at  their  disposal  as  will 
enable  them  to  carry  out  their  work,  and  will  give  them  stand- 
ing and  authority  in  the  works  community.  In  the  case  of 
committees  dealing  with  social  work  outside  the  direct  work 
of  the  shop,  all  meetings  and  work  can  be  expected  to  take 
place  outside  working  hours.  This  should  also  apply  in  a 
general  way  to  meetings  of  shop  stewards  or  of  the  welfare 
committee,  but  it  may  happen  as,  for  instance,  where  a  night 
shift  is  being  worked,  that  it  is  almost  impossible  for  the 
members  to  get  together  except  at  some  time  during  working 
hours.  In  such  cases  permission  should  be  given  for  meetings 
at  regular  stated  times,  say  once  a  fortnight,  or  once  a  month, 
and  the  attendance  at  these  meetings  would  be  considered 
part  of  the  ordinary  work  of  the  members,  and  they  would 
be  paid  accordingly.  Where  possible,  however,  it  is  very  much 
better  for  meetings  to  be  arranged  entirely  outside  working 
hours,  in  which  case  no  payment  should  be  offered,  the  work 
being  looked  on  as  in  the  nature  of  voluntary  public  work. 

A  committee  room  should  be  provided,  and  in  the  case  of 
the  welfare  committee,  the  secretary  might  also  be  provided 
by  the  management.  For  firms  suitably  placed  it  is  most  de- 
sirable that  a  playing  field  should  be  provided,  suitably  laid 
out  for  various  games.  Rent  can  be  asked  for  it  by  the  man- 
agement if  thought  desirable  and  can  be  paid  by  a  social  union 
such  as  that  described  here.  In  the  case  of  all  kinds  of 
recognised  works  committees  the  thing  to  aim  at  is  to  make 
their  work  an  integral  part  of  the  organisation  of  the  works 
community,  providing  whatever  facilities  are  needed  to  make 
it  effective.  On  the  other  hand,  anything  like  subsidising  of 
works  committees  by  the  management  must  be  avoided. 


APPENDIX  XIII 

SUMMARY  OF  CONCLUSIONS  REACHED  BY  A  GROUP 
OF  TWENTY  BRITISH  QUAKER  EMPLOYERS 
AFTER  FOUR  DAYS  OF  DISCUSSION  IN  1917  AND 
1918 

For  some  time  past  a  number  of  employers  belonging  to  the 
Society  of  Friends  have  been  feeling,  as  many  others  are  doing, 
the  duty  of  examining  the  way  in  which  their  religious  faith 
can  be  given  fuller  expression  in  business  life.  The  following 
statement,  designed  as  a  stimulus  to  practical  action,  is  an 
attempt  to  see  how  the  Quaker  conception  of  the  divine  worth 
of  all  life,  which  is  accepted  in  wide  circles  of  thought  to-day, 
affects  our  modern  industrial  life,  and  in  particular  the  re- 
lationship between  employers  and  employed. 

There  is  perhaps  nothing  in  this  statement  that  is  new, 
nothing  that  has  not  been  found  in  the  practise  of  some  em- 
ployers for  years,  nothing  to  which  those  responsible  for  the 
statement  would  have  refused  their  assent  before  the  war. 
But  the  period  of  reconstruction  that  must  follow  the  war 
offers  an  opportunity  for  a  general  raising  of  industrial  stand- 
ards such  as  our  generation  has  not  had  before,  and  imposes  a 
corresponding  obligation  on  each  of  us  to  define  and  face  our 
personal  responsibilities. 

We  have  sought  in  the  course  of  our  discussions  primarily 
to  discover  and  define  the  duties  of  employers  within  the 
present  industrial  system,  not  because  we  hold  a  brief  for  it 
or  regard  it  as  ideal,  but  because  the  task  of  changing  it 
immediately  is  beyond  the  power  of  individual  employers  or 
groups  of  employers.  We  should  indeed,  as  citizens,  work 
towards  its  alteration  in  so  far  as  we  regard  it  as  inconsistent 
with  the  principles  of  our  religion,  but  in  the  meantime  we 
cannot  afford  to  neglect  the  urgent  needs  and  the  outstanding 
opportunities  which  confront  us  in  our  own  factories.     For 

477 


478  APPENDIX  XIII 

most  of  us,  does  not  our  business  afford  the  greatest  opportunity 
we  have  of  serving  our  fellow-men,  and  have  we  yet  ever  fully 
tested  the  potentialities  of  the  present  system,  whatever  criti- 
cisms may  be  urged  against  it,  as  a  field  for  applied  Christian 
ethics? 

The  point  of  view  from  which  we  have  sought  to  approach 
the  problem  is  that  employers  are  persons  fulfilling  certain 
necessary  functions  of  organisation  in  the  great  process  of  in- 
dustry, side  by  side  with  all  others  engaged  in  performing  the 
other  functions  necessary  to  the  maintenance  of  that  process, 
and  that  each  of  these  functions  demands  its  own  qualities 
of  character  and  capacity  and  carries  with  it  its  own  obliga- 
tions and  responsibilities.  We  speak  only  for  employers  en- 
gaged in  the  actual  management  of  businesses,  but  we  wish 
to  state  our  opinion  that  shareholders  cannot  divest  themselves 
of  their  responsibility  for  the  conditions  under  which  their 
dividends  are  earned. 

We  place  What  we  believe  to  be  our  true  status  and  function 
in  society  in  the  forefront  of  our  statement,  because  we  believe 
that  its  full  recognition  is  the  first  need  of  industry  to-day.  We 
believe  that  it  is  only  in  so  far  as  those  engaged  in  industry 
are  inspired  by  a  new  spirit  and  regard  industry  as  a  national 
service,  to  be  carried  on  for  the  benefit  of  the  community,  that 
any  general  improvement  in  industrial  relations  is  possible. 

With  this  initial  word  of  explanation,  we  give  our  con- 
clusions under  the  following  heads: 

Wages. 

The  Status  of  the  Workers. 

Security  of  Employment. 

Working  Conditions  and  the  Social  Life  of  the  Workers. 

Appropriation  of  "Surplus  Profits." 

WAGES 

We  believe  that  the  following  propositions  may  be  laid  down 
with  regard  to  wages: 

( I )  In  determining  the  rate  of  wage  to  be  paid,  a  distinction 
must  be  drawn  between  the  minimum  or  "basic"  wage  and 
wages  above  the  minimum,  which  may  be  referred  to  as 
"secondary"  wages.  The  former  should  be  determined  primar- 
ily by  human   needs;  the  latter  by  the  value  of  the  service 


APPENDIX  XIII  479 

rendered,  as  compared  with  the  value  of  the  services  rendered 
by  workers  who  are  receiving  the  basic  or  minimum  wages. 

(2)  The  Basic  Wages. 

(a)  Men.  The  wages  paid  to  a  man  of  average  industry 
and  capacity  should  at  least  enable  him  to  marry,  to  live 
in  a  decent  house,  and  to  provide  the  necessaries  of  physi- 
cal efficiency  for  a  normal  family,  while  allowing  a  rea- 
sonable margin  for  contingencies  and  recreation. 

(b)  Women.  In  the  case  of  women  engaged  upon  work 
which  has  hitherto  been  regarded  as  man's  work,  the  pay- 
ment should  be  equal  for  the  same  volume  and  quality  of 
work,  assuming  equal  adaptability  to  other  necessary  work. 

In  the  case  of  purely  women's  work,  the  basic  wage  for 
a  woman  of  average  industry  and  capacity  should  be  the 
sum  necessary  to  maintain  her  in  a  decent  dwelling  and 
in  a  state  of  full  physical  efficiency,  and  to  allow  a  rea- 
sonable margin  for  contingencies  and  recreation. 

(3)  The  Secondary  Wage. 

The  secondary  wage  is  remuneration  for  any  special  gift,  or 
qualification  necessary  for  the  performance  of  a  particular 
function,  e.  g.,  special  skill  as  a  tradesman ;  the  special  strength 
of  some  physical  organ,  as  in  the  case  of  a  gas  stoker;  special 
muscular  trairing  and  power,  such  as  that  of  a  lumberman; 
responsibility  for  human  life,  as  in  the  case  of  locomotive 
engine  drivers. 

We  believe  that  if  once  the  basic  wage  is  fixed  at  a  right 
level,  the  precise  amount  of  the  secondary  wage  to  be  paid 
for  different  services  may  be  left,  as  at  present,  to  bargaining. 
But  in  conducting  such  bargaining  the  employer  should  remem- 
ber that  the  pleasure  and  varieties  of  life  are  just  as  dear  to  the 
workers  as  to  himself,  and  they,  too,  need  comfort,  rest  and 
change  of  scene. 

It  is  recognised  that  the  payment  of  wages  on  the  above  basis 
will  require  a  larger  increase  in  the  wage  rates  in  many  indus- 
tries than  some  of  them  could  at  present  hear.  We  believe, 
however,  that  the  payment  of  such  wages  should  be  regarded 
by  employers  as  a  necessary  business  liability.  Till  that  is 
discharged  they  should  very  strictly  limit  their  own  remunera- 
tion for  their  services,  nor  should  they  pay  larger  dividends 
upon  borrowed  capital  than  is  essential  to  ensure  an  adequate 
supply.     But  if  at  the  moment  really  adequate  wages  cannot 


48o  APPENDIX  XIII 

be  paid,  the  earnest  attention  of  the  management  should  be 
turned  to  improving  the  processes  and  general  efficiency  of 
their  business  organisation,  by  the  use  of  engineering  and 
chemical  science,  adequate  costing  systems,  etc. 

While  we  emphasise  the  obligation  on  employers  to  do  every- 
thing in  their  power  to  ensure  the  businesses  under  their  con- 
trol shall  be  able  to  pay  wages  on  the  above  basis,  we  believe 
that  the  cooperation  of  the  employees  in  the  form  of  better  and 
more  intelligent  work  will  generally  be  needed  to  increase  the 
funds  available.  The  need  of  evoking  this  added  interest  and 
stimulating  a  cooperative  spirit  should  be  borne  in  mind  when 
deciding  on  methods  of  remuneration. 

It  may  be  found  that  the  most  effective  service  can  be  ren- 
dered to  the  community  in  some  industries  only  by  some  form 
of  combination  of  independent  firms.  Where  this  is  the  case, 
we  should  assist  in  the  organisation  and  management  of  such 
combinations,  but  only  on  condition  that  the  consumer  is  ef- 
fectively protected,  by  state  action  or  otherwise,  against  ex- 
ploitation. 

STATUS 

The  worker  asks  to-day  for  more  than  an  improvement  in  his 
economic  position.  He  claims  from  employers  and  managers 
the  clear  recognition  of  his  rights  as  a  person.  The  justice  of 
this  claim  our  religion  compels  us  to  admit.  We  cannot  regard 
human  beings  as  if  they  were  merely  so  many  units  of  brain 
power,  so  many  of  nervous  or  muscular  energy.  We  must 
cooperate  with  them,  and  treat  them  as  we  ourselves  should 
wish  to  be  treated.  This  position  involves  the  surrender  by 
capital  of  its  supposed  right  to  dictate  to  labour  the  conditions 
under  which  work  shall  be  carried  on.  It  involves  more;  the 
frank  avowal  that  all  matters  affecting  the  workers  should  be 
decided  in  consultation  with  them,  when  once  they  are  recog- 
nised as  members  of  an  all-embracing  human  brotherhood. 

What  machinery  can  be  devised  which  will  enable  industry 
to  adopt  these  principles,  without  endangering  its  productivity, 
on  which  the  wages  of  both  labour  and  capital  ultimately 
depend  ? 

In  answering  this  question  we  shall  make  certain  definite 
proposals,  but  we  wish  to  preface  them  by  stating  our  belief 
that  the  creation  of  machinery,  however  excellent,  is  less  im- 


APPENDIX  XIII  481 

portant  than  a  living  desire  on  the  part  of  employers  to  give 
full  expression  to  their  fundamental  religious  beliefs  in  the 
relations  they  establish  with  their  workers. 

We  now  pass  to  detailed  proposals. 

The  management  of  a  business  may  be  divided  broadly 
under  three  heads : 

(a)  Financial 

The  provision  of  capital  and  appropriation  of  profit;  rela- 
tions  with    shareholders,    bankers,    competing    businesses,    the 
state,  terms  of  credit,  etc. 
(6)   Commercial 

Determination  of  the  general  character  of  the  goods  to  be 
manufactured  or  of  the  class  of  work  to  be  undertaken;  pur- 
chase of  materials;  sale  of  product;  advertising, 
(c)  Industrial 

Control  of  processes  and  machinery;  nature  of  product;  en- 
gagement and  dismissal  of  employees;  hours  of  work,  rates  of 
pay,  bonuses,  etc.;  welfare  work;  shop  discipline;  relations 
with  trade  unions. 

V/ith  the  financial  and  commercial  aspects  of  the  business 
the  worker  is  not  at  present  so  directly  concerned,  although 
indirectly  they  affect  him  vitally.  But  in  the  industrial  policy 
of  the  business  he  is  directly  and  continuously  interested,  and 
he  is  capable  of  helping  to  determine  it.  How  can  we  give 
him  an  opportunity  of  doing  this? 

As  an  initial  step,  any  existing  shop  committees,  such  as 
that  of  the  shop  stewards  in  engineering  works,  should  be 
formally  recognised.  But,  in  the  absence  of  such  bodies,  we 
recommend  the  establishment  of  committees  or  works  coun- 
cils, in  which  the  chosen  representatives  of  the  workers  should 
discuss  matters  which  concern  them,  first  alone,  but  secondly, 
and  at  frequent  intervals,  with  the  management.  In  this  con- 
nection it  would  be  essential  to  secure  the  cooperation  of  trade 
unions  and  to  make  it  certain  that  their  position  would  not  be 
prejudiced  by  the  existence  of  such  councils.  When  prac- 
ticable, it  might  be  well  to  provide  for  the  appointment  by 
the  trade  union  concerned  of  the  employees  to  serve  on  the 
councils  or  committees,  which  should  constitute  the  regular 
medium  through  which  the  employees  address  suggestions  and 
complaints  to  the  management,  and  discuss  with  it  all  pro- 
posed changes  which  are  likely  to  affect  them. 


482  APPENDIX  XIII 

Questions  of  wage  rates,  discipline  and  shop  rules,  the  en- 
gagement and  dismissal  of  workers,  the  time  and  duration  of 
factory  holidays,  adjustments  of  working  hours  and  number 
of  staff  to  meet  shortage  of  work,  health,  canteen,  and  other 
social  work  might  be  referred  to  these  councils  for  their 
opinion  or  decision.  It  is  fully  realised  that  experience  on 
works  councils  may  and  should  train  the  members  for  greater 
participation  in  the  control  of  the  business,  and  enable  them 
ultimately  to  take  part  in  the  commercial  and  financial  ad- 
ministration. 

When  industry,  now  being  conducted  by  methods  hurriedly 
devised  to  meet  abnormal  exigencies,  is  reestablished  on  a 
permanent  peace  footing,  conditions  will  be  widely  different 
from  those  existing  before  the  war.  It  is  of  the  utmost  im- 
portance that  employers  and  workers  should  cooperate,  frankly 
and  cordially,  in  determining  the  new  conditions.  The  appli- 
cation to  individual  firms  of  general  principles  agreed  upon 
by  the  trade  unions  and  employers  might  very  suitably  be  dis- 
cussed in  the  councils  referred  to  above. 

SECURITY   OF   EMPLOYMENT 

Regarding  the  industrial  life  of  the  worker  from  the  stand- 
point of  his  whole  personality,  hardly  anything  is  of  greater 
moment  than  that  while  he  is  willing  to  work  and  capable  of 
doing  so  he  should  be  able  to  rely  upon  a  regular  income. 
It  is  universally  acknowledged  that  insecurity  of  employment, 
which  is  found  in  the  most  aggravated  form  among  casual 
workers,  such  as  dockers,  has  a  deteriorating  effect  on  both 
physique  and  character.  We  believe,  moreover,  that  restricted 
output,  and  opposition  to  the  introduction  of  machinery,  are 
almost  always  the  result  of  the  employee's  fear  that  he  or  his 
fellow-worker  may  be  thrown  out  of  employment. 

We  believe  that  it  is  the  duty  of  employers  to  do  their 
utmost  to  abolish  casual  labour  and  to  render  employment  as 
regular  as  possible. 

It  is  not  within  the  scope  of  this  memorandum  to  discuss 
any  measures  which  should  be  taken  by  the  state,  or  by  trade 
unions  or  employers'  federations,  in  furtherance  of  these  ends. 
But  individual  employers  can  and  should,  do  much  to  remedy 
the  present  evil,  and  we  make  the  following  suggestions: 

(i)  The  business  should  be  carefully  organised 


APPENDIX  XIII  483 

(o)  With  a  view  to  reducing  the  employment  of  casual 
labour  to  the  very  lowest  limit;  and 

(b)  To  regularising  work  throughout  the  year  so  far  as 
possible. 

(2)  Where  labour-saving  machinery  is  introduced  every 
effort  should  be  made  to  absorb  the  workers  displaced,  without 
loss  of  wage,  in  other  departments  of  the  business.  If  this  is 
impracticable,  the  firm  should  endeavour  to  find  work  for  them 
elsewhere.  The  same  rule  applies  to  a  temporary  surplus  of 
labour  which  may  be  created  by  any  improvement  in  production. 

A  guarantee  to  absorb  displaced  workers  in  other  depart- 
ments may  lead  to  a  temporary  surplus  of  labour,  but  in  most 
cases  this  condition  of  things  would  soon  be  rectified  by  the 
normal  and  inevitable  leakage  of  labour.  A  portion  of  any 
extra  profits  arising  from  labour-saving  improvements  might 
be  placed  to  a  special  reserve  fund  to  compensate  workers  who 
may  be  displaced  and  cannot  be  absorbed  or  placed  elsewhere. 

(3)  The  dismissal  of  employees  should  only  take  place  as  a 
disciplinary  measure  in  the  last  resort.  Only  men  and  women 
who  can  be  relied  upon  to  act  justly  should  be  given  the  power 
of  suspension ;  and  appeal  to  the  management  should  always 
be  allowed  before  dismissal.  The  matter  will  frequently  be 
one  for  consultation  with  the  workers. 

(4)  When  adolescents  are  employed  on  work  which  does 
not  fit  them  for  any  adult  occupation,  special  provision  should 
be  made  either  for  their  absorption  when  they  reach  adult  age 
or  for  their  training  for  some  alternative  occupation. 

WORKING  CONDITIONS 

The  working  conditions  of  a  factory  should  enable  and 
encourage  every  worker  to  be  and  to  do  his  best.  These  con- 
ditions may  be  considered  under  two  heads. 

Personal  Environment 

From  the  moment  that  a  worker  enters  a  factory  he  should 
be  regarded  as  an  integral  part  of  a  living  organism,  not  a 
mere  dividend-producing  machine,  and  treated  with  respect 
and  courtesy.  There  should  be  no  nagging  or  bullying  by 
those  in  authority,  but,  on  the  contrary,  insight  and  leader- 
ship.    This  involves  careful  choice  of  overlookers  and  man- 


484  APPENDIX  XIII 

agers,  who  should  be  able  both  to  lead  and  inspire.  At  present 
such  officers  are  often  selected  solely  on  account  of  their  tech- 
nical knowledge,  and  sometimes,  it  is  to  be  feared,  because 
they  possess  the  faculty  of  getting  work  out  of  men  by  driving 
them. 

But  if  the  managers  and  foremen  are  to  be  men  of  the 
right  type,  they  should  have  ample  opportunities  for  becoming 
acquainted  with  the  employer's  point  of  view,  and  also  for 
acquiring  a  broad,  sane  outlook  on  human  and  industrial  re- 
lationships. Such  opportunities  could  hardly  be  given  in  the 
course  of  one  or  two  conferences ;  but  a  series  of  classes  or 
conferences  under  inspiring  leadership  might  be  arranged,  some 
for  those  already  in  positions  of  responsibility,  others  for  those 
who  desire  to  fit  themselves  for  such  posts  in  the  future.  The 
instruction  given  should  cover  a  fairly  wide  field,  and  deal 
inter  alia  with  economics,  industrial  history,  trade  unionism, 
and  psychology. 

We  have  been  informed  that  in  some  localities  much  ad- 
vantage has  already  been  derived  from  such  classes.  Where 
they  do  not  exist,  we  think  that  employers  might  suitably  try 
to  introduce  them  in  connection  with  their  own  factories,  or 
possibly  in  association  with  others  in  the  neighbourhood. 

It  has  been  suggested,  and  the  idea  is  well  worthy  of  con- 
sideration, that  workers  might  be  encouraged  to  a  far  greater 
extent  than  is  usual  to  make  themselves  responsible  for  main- 
taining discipline.  We  have  been  told  of  cases  in  which  ex- 
periments in  this  direction  have  been  markedly  successful. 

Happiness  in  work  should  be  regarded  as  a  definite  aim 
and  asset,  and  the  personal  well-being  of  every  worker  should 
be  an  essential  part  of  the  employer's  objective. 


Material  Environment 

Employers  should  surround  their  employees  with  a  material 
environment  at  work  such  as  they  would  desire  for  themselves 
or  for  their  children.  This  will  mean  that  workrooms  are 
properly  ventilated  and  kept  at  suitable  temperatures,  that 
they  are  adequately  lit,  and  that  due  regard  is  paid  to  cleanli- 
ness. Cloak-rooms  and  lavatories  should  be  so  kept  that  em- 
ployees coming  from  well-kept  homes  may  find  no  cause  for 
complaint.     The  workers  should  be  safeguarded  against  any 


APPENDIX  XIII  485 

undue  strain  from  the  length  of  the  working  day  or  the  severity 
of  labour.  In  determining  systems  of  payment  it  should  never 
be  forgotten  that  unwise  methods  of  stimulating  workers  to 
do  their  utmost  may  result  in  overstrain.  Facilities  should 
be  given  them  for  spending  the  dinner-hour  under  restful  and 
comfortable  conditions,  as  well  as  for  obtaining  food  at  rea- 
sonable rates.  If  such  facilities  cannot  be  provided  within 
the  factory  they  might  perhaps  be  arranged  outside. 

Again,  in  organising  the  work,  employers  should  remember 
that  confinement  to  one  monotonous  task,  not  only  month 
after  month  but  year  after  year,  is  apt  to  deaden  the  intellect 
and  depress  the  vitality  of  the  worker. 

We  have  merely  given  examples  of  the  many  ways  in  which 
a  fundamental  religious  principle  must  inevitably  react  upon 
the  conditions  of  the  factory.  If  it  be  urged  that  to  carry 
out  the  above  suggestions  would  often  involve  too  great  an  ex- 
penditure, we  reply  that  inefficiency  and  low  productivity  in 
the  workers  are  frequently  due  to  the  absence  of  suitable 
working  conditions. 

Social  Conditions 

We  have  considered  the  relation  of  the  employer  as  such 
to  the  problems  of  providing  adequate  housing  accommoda- 
tion, and  full  facilities  for  the  recreation  and  education  of  the 
workers.  It  seems  to  us,  however,  that  his  responsibility  in 
this  connection,  as  employer,  ends  with  the  payment  of  wages 
which  will  allow  his  workers  to  live  in  comfortable  homes, 
and  with  the  establishment  of  a  working  day  which  will  leave 
them  time  for  recreation,  reading,  or  to  attend  educational 
classes.  With  the  employer's  duties  as  citizen,  which  will  bring 
him  into  close  touch,  not  only  with  the  housing  and  educational 
problems  but  many  others,  we  are  not  here  concerned,  with  the 
proviso  that  his  aim  shall  always  be  to  subordinate  industry 
to  the  needs  of  citizenship,  rather  than  citizenship  to  the 
needs  of  industry.  We  welcome  the  legislative  proposals  now 
being  made  for  the  improvement  of  the  national  educational 
system,  and  consider  that  employers  should  put  up  with  any 
inconvenience  rather  than  hamper  their  achievement. 

APPROPRIATION    OF    "SURPLUS    PROFITS" 

We  have  discussed  the  principles  which  should  be  applied 
to   the   appropriation   of   "surplus   profits"   where    such   exist. 


486  APPENDIX  XIII 

By  "surplus  profits"  is  here  meant  any  surplus  which  may 
remain  over  when  labour  has  been  paid  on  the  scale  referred 
to  above,  and  managers  and  directors  have  been  remunerated 
according  to  the  market  value  of  their  services;  when  capital 
has  received  the  rate  of  interest  necessary  to  ensure  an  ade- 
quate supply,  having  regard  to  the  risk  involved,  and  when 
necessary  reserves  have  been  made  for  the  security  and  de- 
velopment of  the  business. 

(i)   Surplus  profits  may  go  to  one  or  more  of  the  following: 

(a)  The  proprietors  of  the  business,  whether  private  indi- 
viduals or  ordinary  shareholders. 

(b)  The  directors  and  principal  managers,  who  may  or  may 
not  be  the  same  as  the  persons  mentioned  under  (a). 

(c)  The  employees. 

(d)  The  consumers. 

(e)  The  community  generally. 

(2)  We  cannot  believe  that  either  the  proprietors  or  the 
workers  are  entitled  to  the  whole  of  the  surplus  profits  of  the 
business,  though  they  might  reasonably  ask  for  such  a  share  as 
would  give  them  an  interest  in  its  financial  prosperity. 

(3)  The  consumer  should  never  be  exploited.  The  price 
charged  to  him  should  always  be  reasonable,  having  in  view 
the  average  cost  of  production  and  distribution;  and  the  state 
should  be  asked  to  interfere  to  protect  his  interests  when  they 
are  threatened  by  monopoly. 

(4)  We  believe  that  in  equity  the  community  may  claim 
the  greater  part  of  surplus  profits.  If  this  is  not  taken  in  the 
form  of  taxation,  we  think  that  it  should  be  regarded  by  those 
into  whose  hands  it  passes  as  held  in  trust  for  the  community. 
We  are  not  prepared  to  suggest  in  detail  schemes  by  which 
such  a  trust  should  be  administered.  If  the  profits  are  taken 
in  the  ordinary  way  by  the  proprietors,  they  should  be  re- 
garded as  a  trust  and  spent  for  the  common  good,  or  the 
proprietors  might  limit  the  amount  they  themselves  took  out  of 
the  business,  while  surplus  profits  were  put  into  a  separate 
account,  and  spent,  at  the  joint  discretion  of  the  proprietors 
and  workers,  for  the  benefit  of  the  general  public.  Our  point 
is  that  the  bulk  of  them  at  least  belongs  to  the  community, 
and  should  be  used  in  its  interests. 

In  this  connection  we  would  ask  all  employers  to  consider 
very  carefully  whether  their  style  of  living  and  personal  ex- 


APPENDIX  XIII  487 

penditure  are  restricted  to  what  is  needed  to  ensure  the  efficient 
performance  of  their  functions  in  society.  More  than  this  is 
waste,  and  is,  moreover,  a  great  cause  of  class  divisions. 

CONCLUSION 

In  regard  to  many  of  the  matters  referred  to  in  the  preceding 
pages  there  is  ample  room  for  experiments.  Pioneers  and  ex- 
plorers, and  "the  makers  of  roads,"  are  needed  just  as  urgently 
in  the  industrial  sphere  as  in  the  opening  up  of  new  tracts  of 
fertile  country.  But  we  believe  that  if  the  longing  for  a  better 
social  order  once  grips  the  employing  classes,  such  pioneers 
will  not  be  lacking. 

We  believe  it  to  be  our  duty  to  promote  a  progressive  spirit 
in  the  various  trade  organisations  with  which  we  may  be  asso- 
ciated. In  this  connection  we  suggest  the  desirability  of  giving 
full  information  as  to  wages,  average  costs,  and  average  pro- 
fits in  the  industry,  as  a  basis  for  effectual  collective  bargain- 
ing, and  as  a  recognition  of  the  public  character  of  our  in- 
dustrial functions. 

Some  employer  may  tell  us  that  we  are  asking  him  to  draw 
too  many  practical  inferences  from  a  religious  formula.  But 
the  conviction  we  have  outlined  is  more  than  a  formula.  It 
is  a  vantage  ground,  from  which  we  can  survey  the  whole 
field  of  social  and  industrial  life,  seeing  in  it,  not  sheer  blind 
turmoil,  but  a  vast  meaning  and  a  vast  hope.  There  is  but 
one  way  of  escaping  from  the  implications  of  such  a  convic- 
tion, to  abandon  it  entirely,  to  forsake  the  vantage  ground, 
and  to  forget  the  only  vision  that  could  dominate  our  whole 
lives.  Then  the  world  of  industry  may  revert  to  a  soulless 
chaos  in  which  we  strive  for  our  own  ends.  But  those  ends, 
even  as  we  achieve  them,  will  seem  meaningless  and  vain. 

Doubtless,  to  take  the  other  course,  and  claim  for  our  re- 
ligious faith  the  final  word  upon  the  problems  with  which  in- 
dustry confronts  us,  may  tax  severely  not  only  our  financial 
resources,  but  heart,  and  will,  and  brain.  But  is  this  a  dis- 
advantage ? 


APPENDIX  XIV 

SHOP  COMMITTEES  AND  LABOUR  BOARDS 

By  Arthur  Gleason 

(Reprinted  from  the  Survey,  May,  1917.) 

What  is  the  workshop  council?  The  head  of  one  of  the 
largest  cocoa  manufactories  in  the  world  has  sent  us  the  details 
of  his  council,  as  now  in  operation  in  the  almond  paste  de- 
partment. The  cocoa  business  is  not  the  best  field  for  study- 
ing workers'  control,  because  the  labour  is  largely  female,  be- 
cause the  industry  is  not  nationally  organised  like  the  build- 
ing and  engineering  trades,  and  because  the  experiment  is 
only  in  its  beginning.  But  with  a  new  application  of  a  prin- 
ciple, we  have  to  take  it  where  we  find  it  and  push  on  with 
the  experiment. 

The  departments  of  the  factory  have  well  defined  sections, 
so  each  section  has  a  sub-  or  sectional  council.  The  number 
of  delegates  for  each  sectional  council  is  fixed  on  the  basis 
of  one  delegate  for  every  twelve  workers  (of  whatever  age) 
or  part  of  twelve  exceeding  six,  employed  in  the  section.  Sit- 
ting with  these  at  the  meetings  of  each  sectional  council  and 
having  equal  powers  with  them,  are  the  manager  of  the  de- 
partment with  the  head  and  sub-overlookers,  monitors  or 
chargemen  of  the  particular  section.  Should  these,  however 
(including  the  manager),  exceed  in  number  the  workers'  dele- 
gates, the  members  of  the  council  representing  the  adminis- 
tration consist  of  the  manager  and  head  overlookers,  together 
with  as  many  of  the  sub-overlookers,  chargemen  and  monitors 
(elected  by  ballot  amongst  themselves)  as  are  required  to 
make  up  a  number  equal  to  that  of  the  workers'  delegates. 
The  manager  of  the  department  is  ex-officio  chairman  of  the 
sectional  councils.  He  does  not  have  a  casting  vote.  In  case 
of  a  drawn  vote  the  matter  is  submitted  to  the  director  con- 
trolling the  department. 

In  addition,  there  will  be  one  delegate  appointed  by  each 

488 


APPENDIX  XIV  489 

union  concerned  (for  the  men's  sectional  councils  from  the 
men's  union,  and  for  the  women's  sectional  councils  from  the 
women's  union),  who  shall  be  allowed  to  speak  but  shall  have 
no  vote.  Such  delegates  shall  be  deemed  to  hold  a  watching 
brief  for  the  union,  but  shall  be  in  the  employment  of  the 
firm  and  working  in  the  department,  and  preferably,  though 
not  necessarily,  in  the  section. 

The  departmentaj  council  is  a  distinct  body  from  the  sec- 
tional councils  and  consists  of  one  member  for  every  fifty 
workers  (or  part  of  fifty  exceeding  twenty-five),  with  an 
equal  number  of  the  administrative  staff,  namely,  manager, 
head  overlookers,  sub-overlookers,  monitors  and  chargemen. 
Where  these  exceed  the  workers,  the  members  representing 
the  administration  will  consist  of  the  manager  and  head  over- 
lookers, together  with  as  many  of  the  sub-overlookers,  charge- 
men  and  monitors  (elected  by  ballot  amongst  themselves), 
as  are  required  to  make  up  a  number  equal  to  that  of  the 
workers'   delegates. 

At  the  meetings  of  the  departmental  councils  there  will 
also  be  one  delegate  appointed  by  the  union  representing  the 
men  and  one  by  the  union  representing  the  women,  who  shall 
be  allowed  to  speak,  but  shall  have  no  votes.  Such  delegates 
shall  be  deemed  to  hold  a  watching  brief  for  the  union,  but 
shall  be  in  the  employment  of  the  firm  and  working  in  the 
department. 

Further,  the  workers  are  entitled  to  have  the  attendance 
of  a  permanent  official  of  their  union,  not  necessarily  in  the 
employment  of  the  firm,  during  the  discussion  of  any  matter 
on  which  they  consider  that  they  should  have  skilled  assist- 
ance and  advice.  Any  such  official  attending  a  departmental 
council  meeting  shall  withdraw  as  soon  as  the  matter  is  dis- 
posed of  upon  which  his  or  her  advice  has  been  required. 

Nothing  that  takes  place  at  a  sectional  or  departmental 
council  shall  prejudice  the  trade  union  in  raising  any  ques- 
tion in  the  ordinary  way.  Questions  of  general  principle,  such 
as  the  working  week,  wage  standards  and  general  wage  rules, 
shall  not  be  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  councils. 

All  male  employees  over  twenty-one  years  of  age  and  all 
female  employees  over  sixteen,  who  have  been  employed  by 
the  firms  for  six  months  (whether  on  the  regular  staff  or  not), 
will  be  eligible  to  vote  for  delegates  to  both  the  sectional  or 
departmental  councils  and  to  become  members  of  such  coun- 


490  APPENDIX  XIV 

cils.  Delegates  are  elected  to  serve  for  one  year.  They  will 
be  eligible  for  re-election  so  long  as  they  remain  in  the  em- 
ployment of  the  company.  No  deduction  will  be  made  from 
the  wages  of  day-workers  for  the  time  occupied  as  delegates 
in  attending  the  council  meetings,  and  piece-workers  will  re- 
ceive an  average  wage  for  the  time  so  occupied. 

Based  on  this  constitution,   the   sectional  and  departmental 
councils  in  the  almond  paste  department  work  out  as  follows: 

SECTIONAL 

There  are  six  sectional  councils  as  under : 
Women     (i)     Bottoms  and  centres. 

(2)  Pipers  and  coverers. 

(3)  Makers. 

(4)  Packers  and  labellers. 

Men  (5)     Slab,  machine  and  boiling  (4th  floor). 

(6)     Crystallising  and  piping  (5th  floor),  cage  and  carting 
(3rd  floor). 

The  number  of  delegates  for  each  of  these  councils  work 
out  thus: 

No.  of 
(i)     Bottoms  and  Centres  delegates 

Bottoms — Room    1 2 

Bottoms — Room  2   2 

Centres — Room  I  3 

Centres — Room  2  I 

Total    8 

(2)  Pipers  and  coverers 

Room  I   II 

Room  2  S 

Total    16 

(3)  Makers    6 

(4)  Packers  and  labellers 

Packers    9 

Labellers   2 

Total II 

(5)  Slab,  machine  and  boiling  (4th  floor) S 

(6)  Crystallising  and  Piping  (5th  floor)   6 

Cage  and  carting  (3rd  floor) I 

Total    7 


APPENDIX  XIV 


491 


The  number  of  delegates  to  the  departmental  council  is 
shown  below: 

No.  of 

Bottoms  and  centres  delegates 

Bottoms — Rooms  i  and  2 i 

Centres — Rooms  i  and  2 i 

Pipers  and  coverers 

Room  I    3 

Room  2  I 

Makers    2 

Packers  and  labellers   2 

Slab,  machine  and  boiling  (4th  floor) I 

Crystallising  and  piping   (sth  floor)   and  cage  and  cart- 
ing (3rd  floor)   1 

Total    12 

What  are  the  matters  dealt  with  by  these  works  coun- 
cils? 

(i)  The  criticism  of  any  piece  wages  not  thought  to  be  fair  or 
adequate,  and  the  consideration  of  suggestions  for  adjustment. 

(2)  The  consideration  of  conditions  and  hours  of  work  in  the 
department. 

(3)  The  consideration  of  departmental  organisation  and  pro- 
duction. 

(4)  Rules  and  descipline. 

In  the  Engineering  Trades 

The  engineering  trades  are  perfecting  a  similar  system  of 
workers'  control.  F.  S.  Button,  formerly  of  the  executive 
council  of  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Engineers,  and  G.  D.  H. 
Cole  have  drawn  up  the  outline. 


SHOP   COMMITTEES 

The  committee  comprises  representatives  from  the  management 
and  the  workpeople  in  equal  numbers.  The  management  choose 
their  own  representatives.  The  workpeople  elect  by  ballot  their 
representatives.  Care  should  be  taken  that  the  trade  unions  shall 
be  represented.  Each  side  appoints  its  own  chairman  and  secretary. 
Each  side  submits  its  agenda  to  the  other  for  discussion  at  joint 
meetings  which  should  be  held  weekly  during  workshop  hours  to 
deal  with : 

I.  Improved  methods  of  manufacture,  tools,  jigs,  gauges,  and  to 
make  suggestions  thereon;  also  new  methods  of  production; 


492  APPENDIX  XIV 

2.     Class  of  labour  to  be  used  on  new  types  or  reconstructed  ma- 
chines ; 
3      Criticism  and  adjustment  in  existing  piece-work  prices; 

4.  Co-operation  with  the  management  in  supervision; 

5.  Shop  troubles  and  grievances ; 

6.  Suspensions  and  dismissals  consequent  upon  slackness  in  trade; 

7.  Shop  rules — timekeeping,  meal  hours,  cleaning  time,  clock  al- 
lowances, changes  in  starting  time ; 

8  Suggestions  to  change  the  method  of  remuneration  from  day 
work  to  piece  work  or  a  bonus  system,  or  vice  versa; 

9.  The  problem  of  the  disabled  soldier ; 

10.  Matters  relating  to  welfare ; 

11.  Demarcation  between  trades  with  the  free  sanction  of  the 
unions  concerned ; 

12.  Advise  generally  on  labour  and  workshop  conditions. 

The  committee  must  not  interfere  with  recognised  trade  union 
practices  nor  deal  with  matters  covered  by  agreements,  except  with 
approval  of  the  parties  concerned. 

Where  it  is  necessary  owing  to  the  complex  organisation  of  the 
works  to  set  up  more  than  one  shop  committee,  a 

CENTRAL  WORKS  COUNCIL 

shall  be  formed  from  the  shop  committee. 

The  basis  of  representation  shall  in  each  case  be  the  same.  The 
board  of  directors  shall  appoint  the  chairman  for  its  side,  the  trade 
union  shall  choose  a  representative  workman  as  chairman  for  the 
side  of  the  workpeople.  The  council  shall  sit  during  factory  hours 
to  deal  with : 

1.  Reports  from  shop  committees ; 

2.  Refer  back  unadopted  portions  of  report  to  shop  committee 
concerned ; 

3.  Decide  matters  from  such  reports  which  affect  the  factory  as 
a  whole  as  distinct  from  the  shop ; 

4.  Generally  to  assist  the  management  in  matters  relating  to  pro- 
duction and  organisation ; 

5.  To  initiate  reforms  arising  out  of  new  legislation  affecting 
factories  and  workshops ; 

6.  Assist  after  the  war  period  in  the  resumption  of  existing  laws; 

7.  Consider  matters  referred  to  them  by  the  board  of  directors  or 
the  workpeople's  side  of  the  workshop  committees ; 

8.  To  appoint  a  representative  from  each  side  of  the  council  to 
sit  with  the  board  of  directors  when  reports  from  the  council  are 
being  considered. 

No  workshop  committee  or  works  council  shall  have  any  power  to 
impose  any  restriction  on  the  employers  or  workpeople  either  with 
regard  to  lock-outs  or  strikes,  or  to  institute  any  system  of  profit- 
sharing  or  co-partnership. 

The  council  must  not  interfere  with  recognised  trade  union  prac- 
tices nor  deal  with  matters  covered  by  agreements  except  with 
approval  of  the  parties  concerned. 


APPENDIX  XIV  493 

LOCAL  JOINT  COMMITTEES 

The  members  shall  consist  of  an  equal  number  of  employers  and 
workpeople  appointed  by  the  employers'  associations  and  by  the 
trade  union  organisations  in  the  district. 

Each  side  shall  appoint  a  chairman  and  secretary.  At  local  con- 
ferences each  chairman  shall  preside  over  his  own  side.  Each  side 
shall  be  entitled  to  hold  a  preliminary  meeting  separately  to  consider 
and  prepare  its  agenda  and  to  discuss  its  policy  on  questions  to  be 
submitted  to  the  local  conferences. 

The  committee  shall  meet  at  least  fortnightly,  and  the  following 
matters  should  be  within  its  competence : 

1.  References  from  each  side  of  works  council  within  its  area; 

2.  Codification,  unification  and  amendment  of  working  rules: 

(a)  Holidays. 

(b)  Sunday  labour. 

(c)  Overtime. 

(d)  Shift  systems. 

(e)  Demarcation  between  classes  of  labour. 

3.  Co-ordination  of  local  workshop  practice ; 

4.  General  district  matters  relating  to  welfare  work; 

5.  Discuss,  by  mutual  consent  and  reference,  matters  covered  by 
existing  agreements. 

6.  Discuss  relations  between  both  sides  not  covered  by  existing 
agreements. 

In  the  period  succeeding  the  war  the  committee  should  also  be 
encouraged  to  settle  by  agreement : 

1.  Questions  arising  out  of  the  restoration  of  trade  union  condi- 
tions including  questions  of  priority,  of  employment  and  the  resto- 
ration of  trade  union  rules  and  customs; 

2.  Problems  of  the  employment  of  disabled  soldiers  and  sailors ; 

3.  Questions  relating  to  demobilisation  and  the  discharge  and  re- 
employment of  emergency  workers. 

The  committee  shall  take  no  action  that  contravenes  any  agree- 
ment between  employers  and  the  trade  unions,  whether  such  agree- 
ment be  local  or  national  in  character. 

CENTRAL  CONCILIATION  BOARD 

Such  board  shall  be  set  up  in  each  industry  and  shall  be  repre- 
sentative of  the  central  executive  of  employers  and  the  trade  union 
or  unions  concerned ; 

The  representation  shall  be  equal  in  numbers,  each  side  having 
the  right  to  appoint  a  chairman  and  secretary. 

Each  side  shall  be  entitled  to  hold  a  preliminary  meeting  to  con- 
sider and  discuss  its  policy  on  the  agenda. 

The  matters  competent  for  discussion  shall  be  confined  to : 

1.  Appeals  from  the  local  joint  committees;  appeals  may  be  made 
by  each  side  of  the  local  joint  committees.  Representatives  from 
the  local  joint  committees  shall  attend  in  a  consultative  capacity, 
but  shall  not  sit  in  session  or  take  official  part  in  the  proceedings; 

2.  Discuss  relations  between  employers  and  workpeople  not  cqv- 


494  APPENDIX  XIV 

ered  by  existing  agreements;  no  new  agreements  to  be  arranged 
without  the  full  concurrence  of  all  parties  concerned ; 

3.  Act  as  a  permanent  advisory  board  to  the  government  on  all 
questions  affecting  the  industry,  and  to  be  empowered  to  suggest 
alterations,  modifications  and  additions  to  existing  laws,  or  fresh 
enactments  required; 

4.  Such  proposed  new  legislation  or  amendments  to  existing  laws 
to  be  submitted  to  the  department  of  state  concerned ; 

5.  In  the  event  of  such  department  of  state  refusing  to  accept  in 
whole  or  part  such  proposals,  the  central  conciliation  board  should 
have  the  right  to  appeal  to  the  Cabinet  and  to  state  its  reasons  for 
tabling  its  proposals ; 

6.  The  Cabinet  shall  not  have  the  absolute  right  to  veto  without 
an  appeal  and  vote  in  the  House  of  Commons,  on  the  question 
r3.is6cl 

BENEFITS  RESULTING  TO  INDUSTRY 

1.  Harmony  in  the  factory,  workshop  or  mine. 

2.  Assurance  of  industrial  peace. 

3.  Would  give  the  worker  a  real  chance  to  achieve  responsibility. 

4.  Guarantee  of  continuity  of  labour. 

5.  Tend  to  abolish  the  spirit  of  antagonism  and  distrust. 

6.  Greater  productivity  in  the  workshop. 

7.  Would  provide  the  missing  link  in  industry — co-operation. 

8.  Bring  about  a  real  community  of  interest  between  employers 
and  workpeople,  and  secure  co-ordination  of  the  whole  factory  sys- 
tem so  far  as  the  workshop  is  concerned. 

The  executive  committee  of  the  National  Union  of  Rail- 
waymen  have  drawn  up  their  demand.  "At  each  large  shop 
centre  there  shall  be  formed  a  local  shops  committee.  There 
shall  be  a  central  committee  for  each  railway.  There  shall  be 
established  on  each  railway  a  conciliation  board."  The  fol- 
lowing is  an  example  of  the  method  of  constituting  the  board : 

^  No.  of 

No.  of  represen- 

Groups  of  grades  men  tatives 

(a)  Engine   drivers,   firemen,   cleaners,   electric 

motormen    7,500  4 

(b)  Shed    men,    electric    light    men,    hydraulic 

men,  etc 1,900  i 

(c)  Carriage   and   wagon   examiners,   washers, 

etc 1,200  I 

(d)  Signalmen,  etc 3,ioo  2 

(e)  Guards,  shunters,  etc 4,300  2 

(f)  General  porters,  parcels,  staff,  etc 3,50o  2 

(g)  Goods  shed  and  yard  staff  4,5oo  2 

(h)     Cartage  staff   3,700  2 

( i)     Platelayers   4,600  2 

(  j )     Ballast  men,  etc 2,000  i 

(k)     Signal  and  telegraph  men,  etc 500  i 


APPENDIX  XIV  495 

A  builders'  national  industrial  parliament  has  been  advo- 
cated by  the  National  Associated  Building  Trades  Council, 
representing  the  national  executives  of  the  principal  trade 
unions  in  the  industry.  The  constitution  calls  for  works  com- 
mittees, representing  management  and  labour  in  particular 
shops,  for  joint  district  boards,  and  for  a  national  parliament, 
where  sit  twenty  members  appointed  by  the  Nationel  Federa- 
tion of  Building  Trades  Employers  of  Great  Britain  and  Ire- 
land, and  twenty  members  appointed  by  the  National  Associated 
Building   Trades   Council. 

So  enters  the  principle  of  self-government  in  industry.  This 
is  totally  different  from  compulsory  arbitration,  though  often 
confused  with  it.  Arbitration  deals  with  matters  that  have 
reached  the  boiling  point.  A  joint  board  deals  with  process 
and  relationship  before  friction  has  developed,  and  thus  keeps 
clear  of  that  region  in  men's  minds  where  emotion  is  kindled 
and  where  matters  of  fact  are  heated  into  matters  of  prin- 
ciple. Once  a  question  of  fact  has  become  a  "matter  of  princi- 
ple," it  is  always  difficult  and  often  impossible  for  arbitration 
boards  to  deal  with  it.  This  sharp  distinction  must  be  real- 
ised, because  on  its  recognition  hinges  the  change  in  the  status 
of  the  worker.  By  government  and  private  action  he  is  now 
being  admitted  to  a  place  in  deciding  on  the  next  step,  before 
the  next  step  is  taken.  Many  employers  wish  a  scheme  of 
compulsory  arbitration,  with  penal  clauses  against  striking. 
The  trade  unions  will  not  consent,  because  they  do  not  care 
for  industrial  harmony  by  compulsion.  A  number  of  employ- 
ers will  offer  co-partnerships  and  profit-sharing.  The  trade 
unions  will  not  consent.  Talk  of  national  efficiency  and  world 
markets  alone  will  not  win  the  trade  unions.  To  meet  their 
opposition,  a  measure  of  control  must  be  granted  to  them.  So 
joint  standing  councils  of  employers  and  employed  have  already 
been  formed  and  will  continue  to  be  formed,  to  secure  increased 
productivity  in  industry  and  a  better  status  for  labour.  .  .  . 

The  government  accepted  the  principle  of  self-government 
in  industry  when  in  the  crisis  of  191 5,  Mr.  Tennant,  repre- 
senting the  government,  summoned  the  labour  leaders  to  or- 
ganise the  forces  of  labour.  The  employers  and  the  govern- 
ment were  helpless  unless  aided  by  the  workers  themselves. 
On  that  day,  February  8,  191 5,  the  principle  of  democratic 
control  in  industry  was  established  in  the  modern  state.  This 
system   of   joint   committees  had  indeed  long   existed  in   the 


496  APPENDIX  XIV 

leading  trades,  where  employers  and  union  leaders  met  to  set- 
tle disputes.  But  the  white  flag  of  truce  was  over  the  confer- 
ence, while,  outside,  the  battle  raged.  But  Mr.  Tennant  by  his 
bold  measure  raised  the  joint  committee  to  the  level  of  con- 
tinuous mediation  and  consultation.  .  .  . 

The  joint  board  is  part  of  the  machinery  for  reconstruction. 
The  acceptance  of  it  is  an  acceptance  of  the  principle  of 
democratic  control. 

What  labour  can  manage  and  possesses  the  right  to  manage, 
but  has  not  received  the  permission  to  manage,  are  the  condi- 
tions of  its  own  life — its  working  life  and  its  leisure  life.  The 
installation  of  new  processes,  the  introduction  of  new  machin- 
ery, the  injection  of  new  workers — all  these  alterations  of 
working  conditions  have  been  imposed  upon  the  workers  as 
one  puts  a  new  harness  on  a  horse,  or  shifts  him  from  the 
plough  to  the  tread-mill.  The  workers  have  built  up  their  own 
system  of  protective  devices  to  meet  these  impositions  of  the 
oligarchy  in  control  of  them.  They  have  limited  the  output 
by  "going  gently"  with  the  work.  They  have  limited  the 
number  of  apprentices.  They  have  practised  sabotage  and 
called  strikes.  They  had  no  other  weapons.  The  result  of 
these  protective  devices  has  been  to  lessen  the  volume  of 
production,  to  give  capital  a  smaller  return  on  its  investment 
and  to  cut  down  wages.  The  policy  has  been  bad  for  employer 
and  employe.  But  the  policy  has  received  its  death  blow  in 
this  new  constitution  of  labour  which  I  have  outlined.  Self- 
government  will  not  offer  grave  difficulties  in  the  twelve  or 
fifteen  highly  organised  trades,  where  organised  co-operation 
is  understood.  It  will  come  much  more  slowly  in  the  un- 
skilled occupations.  .  .  . 

But  almost  at  one  stroke,  this  principle  of  self-government 
has  been  greatly  extended.  It  is  all  part  of  the  general  move- 
ment toward  the  organised  state.  The  emp'xOyers  will  form 
great  combines.  The  workers  will  continue  to  develop  the 
strength  of  trade  unions  and  will  exercise  that  strength  in 
the  control  of  their  working  conditions.  In  the  next  five  years 
workers'  control  will  be  the  most  discussed  item  in  England's 
reconstruction.  Because  it  is  in  line  with  democratic  tendency, 
the  movement  will  soon  spread  to  our  country.  It  is  time  that 
our  statesmen,  our  social  experts,  our  writers  and  our  indus- 
trial leaders  begin  to  study  it. 


INDEX 


Addison,   Dr.,   178,   193 

Aliens  in  America,  307 

Allied   diplomacy,   79 

Allied  governments,  labor  pressure 
on,   for  war  aims  statement,  320 

Allied  labor  unity,  273 

Amalgamated  Society  of  Engi- 
neers, 199;  constitution,  160,  161; 
outline   of    workers'    control,    179 

American  aliens  and  immigrant 
groups,  307 

American  Alliance  of  Labor  and 
Democracy,  249,  266,  267,  268, 
308 

American-Allied  conference,  Lon- 
don,  Sept.,    1918,  238 

American  delegates  to  England, 
249 

American  Federation  of  Labor,  44, 
57,  125,  214;  attitude  toward  in- 
ternational conference  proposals, 
230;  Blackpool  meeting,  28;  del- 
egation to  visit  England,  249; 
difficulties  of  communication 
with  British  labor,  241 ;  invita- 
tions to  European  conferences, 
236-237;  "Labor's  War  Aims," 
239;  London  conference  state- 
ment on,  300;  open  diplomacy, 
230;  peace  terms,  238;  political 
activity,  280-281 ;  position  as  to 
British  labor,  240;  position  in- 
terpreted by  James  Wilson,  251 ; 
Stockholm    project,    236 

American  Federationist,  126,  230; 
cables  regarding  international 
labor    conference,   230 

American  labor,  antithesis  to  Brit- 
ish, 255 ;  coming  into  line,  273 ; 
on  the  wrong  side,  266;  out  of 
it,  230 

American  labor  bodies,  125 

American  labor  movement,  126, 
127 ;  statement  at  London  con- 
ference, 288 


American  public  opinion,  306-307 
Ammon,   C.   G.,  on   Gompers'  pro- 
posal,   19 
Anderson,   Mrs.  W.  C.     See  Mac- 

arthur,   Mary 
Anderson,  W.  C,  40;  on  industrial 

conscription,    132-133 
Anthony,   Susan   B.,    141 
Appleton,  W.  A.,  57,  231,  244,  248; 

interview,    249 
Arbeiter-Zeiiung,   318 
Asquith,   H.  H.,  269 
Austria-Hungary,   unrest,   310 
Austrian  peace   note,   305,  321 
Autocracy  vs.   democracy,   296-297 
Baine,  C.  L.,  288 
Balfour,  A.  J.,  159 
Barnes,    G.    N.,    226;    on    breaking 

the    truce,     117;     on     Stockholm 

conference,      13 ;     War     Cabinet 

labor      delegates      to      America, 

244 
Barr  &  Stroud,  184 
Belgian     Labor     Party,     action     at 

London   conference,   63-64,  66 
Belgian  Prince    (ship),  22 
Belgium,  297,  298,  301 
Berger,   Victor,   282 
Berne,    285 ;    International    meeting 

proposed   for   Sept.,   1917,  232 
Birmingham,   208 
Birmingham    meeting,    1916,    18 
Blackpool   meeting,  Sept.,   1917,   16, 

20;    Henderson's   speech,  27 
Bolsheviki,  6,  7,  8,  62,  88 
Bondfield,   Margaret,   115,   140,   141, 

202 
Boycotting  Germany,   224;    sailors, 

261 
Branting,  Hjalmar,  86,  87;  at  June, 

1918,   conference,  99,    loi 
Brest-Litovsk,  8,  17,  62,  89,  96,  293, 

294 
Bridgeman,   Mr.,   189 
Britannic   Alliance,   224 


497 


498 


INDEX 


British    delegates   to  America,   244 

British    Sociahsts.     See    Socialists 

British  Workers'  League,  34 

Bromley,  J.,  115;  at  Blackpool 
meeting,  23 

Bufifalo  convention,  Nov.,  1917,  238 

Bulgarian  United  Social  Demo- 
cratic   Party,   316 

Burnage    Works,    181,    184 

Burns,   John,  40 

Button,  F.  S.,  179 

Cachin,    M.,   292 

Canada,   28 

Canepa,  63 

Cardiff,   212,   226 

Carter,   W.,   12 

Caxton  Hall  meeting,  258,  259 

Central  Empires,  Wilson's  call  to 
vv^orking  classes   of,   309 

Central  Hall,  Westminster,  adop- 
tion of  war  aims  memorandum, 
28;  conference  of  Aug.  10,  1917, 
12;  Memorandum  on  War  Aims, 
adopted  Feb.  20-24,  1918,  29,  67, 
352 ;  Statement  of  War  Aims, 
adopted  at  joint  conference,  Dec. 
28,    1917,  343 

Cheradame,   Andre,   79 

Christian    Commonwealth,   254 

Churchill,   Winston,    125 

Civic  Federation.  See  National 
Civic    Federation 

Civil   offensive,   fruits,   322 

Clyde  Workers'  Committee,  161, 
162 

Clynes,  J.  R.,  at  Blackpool  meet- 
ing, 25 ;  at  Nottingham  meeting, 
43;  biographical  sketch,  120;  in 
controversy,  123;  interview  in 
June,  1918,  122 ;  message  to  rail- 
way strikers,  212;  on  breaking 
the  truce,  118;  on  food  control, 
120;  on  labor  setting  an  exam- 
ple, 271;  personality,   118,   121 

Cocoa   firms,    185 

Cole,  G.  D.  H.,  155,   164,  174,  179, 

193,  32>i,.32,^ 

Collective  bargaining,   127,   180 

Collectivism,   333,  335 

"Common   sense,"    128 

Communal  idea  in  labor  policy,  339 

Compromise,  British  genius  for, 
266 

Conference  projects,  characteris- 
tics  of   British   labor,    17 

Conscientious   objectors,    132 


Conscription,      Thomas      and     the 

Irish  crisis,  205 
Conscription    of    wealth,    135,    136, 

22,6 

Constitution  of  the  British  Labour 
Party,   367 

Control.  See  Self-government  in 
industry 

Cooperative  movement,  143 ;  aims 
of  members,  Izh-I4S;  conference 
of  Oct.,   1917,  144 

Cotter,  J.,  22 

Coventry,   207 

Cramp,   C.   T.,   no 

Crises,    333-334 

Czechs,  86 

Daily  News,  on  the  British  dele- 
gates to  America,  248;  on  the 
London   conference,   78 

Davis,  W.  J.,  201 ;  at  Caxton  Hall 
meeting,   258-259 

Debs,   E.   v.,  282,  297 

Democracy,  autocracy  vs.,  296-297 ; 
diplomacy  of,  300-301 ;  industrial, 
194 ;  place  in  reconstruction,  333 ; 
test,  305,  326;  triumph  in  Sept., 
1918,   30s 

Deportation,  163 

Derby  meeting  of  1918,  25 ;  Gom- 
pers,  285,  286;  resolution  for  a 
trade  union  party,  266;  speakers 
and  discussions,   197 

"Dilution,"   152,   157,   162 

Diplomacy,  new  vs.  old,  326 

Diplomacy  of  labor,  democratic 
results,  300-301,  305-306;  replies 
from  German  and  other  minor- 
ity groups,  316 

Diplomatic  offensive,  results,  2^2 

Drake,   Mrs.  Barbara,    155 

Duncan,  James,  236,  249 

Easley,  R.   M.,  245 

Education,   131 

Elections.     See  General  elections 

Embargoes,  207;  situation  from 
different   angles,   208 

Employers,  new  type,  181 ;  sum- 
mary of  conclusions  of  group  of 
Quaker   employers,  477 

Engineering  trades,  conference  of 
employers  and  employees,  Dec, 
1917,  165;  unions,  160;  women 
in,   152,    157 

England,  old  order  and  new,  136; 
political  and  industrial  develop- 
ments,   105 


INDEX 


490 


English  Round  Table,  85 

Europe,  labor  movement  in  West- 
ern, 334 

Fairchild,  E.  C,  31 

Finance,   democratic,    135,   136 

Fisher,  Victor,  34,  257 

Fitch,  J.   A.,  308 

Foch,    Marshal,  (£ 

Food  control,  J.  R.  Clynes  on,  120 

Force,  82,  323 

Franklin,  Benjamin,  2T2, 

Freedom,    restrictions   on,    132,  133 

Freedom  of  the  press,   308 

French  Socialists,  62,  63,  91,  92 

Frey,  J.   P.,  296,  297 

Friends.    See  Quaker  employers 

Garton   Foundation,   159 

Garvin,   J.    L.,   271 

Gaunt   (Reuben),  &  Sons,  189 

General  elections,  Dec,  1918,  223; 
Labour  Party's  platform,  413; 
results,  269 

General  Federation  of  Trade 
Unions,   18,  56,  201 

German    boycott.      See    Boycotting 

German  people  vs.  German  govern- 
ment,  306,   309,   324 

German  Social  Democratic  Party 
of  Austria,  318,  320 

German  workers,  240,  251,  254,  255 

Germany,  Majority  Socialists,  311, 
315;  Socialism,  65,  335;  Social- 
ism, rift,  313;  unrest  and  upris- 
ing, 310 

Glasgow,   163 

Glazier,  Bruce,  267 

Gleason,  Arthur,  Shop  Committees 
and  Labour  Boards  (reprinted 
from  the  Survey,  May,  1917), 
488 

Glenn,    General,   307 

Golden,  John,  28 

Gompers,  Samuel,  13,  249;  address 
on  Feb.  22,  1918,  83;  at  Derby, 
Sept.,  1918,  196-197,  200;  cable- 
grams to  French  and  to  British 
labor,  234;  circular,  18;  com- 
pared to  Franklin,  273 ;  ex- 
changes with  German  labor,  230; 
"Garbled  text"  cablegram,  241 ; 
Henderson  and,  237;  leadership, 
283;  part  in  the  London  confer- 
ence, 275,  302,  303 ;  personality, 
274,  276,  277;  policy,  126 
Government  and  labor  delegations, 
250 


Government  Commission  of  In- 
quiry into  Industrial  Unrest,   157 

Governments,  labor  pressure  on  Al- 
lied, to  state  war  aims,  320 

"Gray  hairs,"   128 

Greenwood,  G.  A.,   193 

Guild-Socialists,   336 

Hall,  Martin,  185 

Hanley,   225 

Hardie,   Keir,  33 

Hartshorn,  Vernon,  168,   173 

Health,   131 

Henderson,  Arthur,  6;  at  Black- 
pool meeting,  27 ;  at  Derby  meet- 
ing, 200;  at  June  conference, 
1918,  on  breaking  truce,  114;  at 
Oldham,  228;  central  policy,  267; 
German  estimate  and  American 
radical  estimate,  268 ;  Gompers 
and,  237 ;  link  of  various  ele- 
ments, 49;  on  adoption  of  war 
aims  memorandum,  29;  on  war 
and  peace  (Feb.,  1918),  204;  per- 
sonality, 50,  94,  95 ;  resignation 
from  War  Cabinet,  16,  53;  Rus- 
sian views  in  Aug.,  1917,  11; 
speech  at  luncheon  of  London 
Conference,   78-79 

Henson,  J.,  21 

Hertling  cabinet,  315 

Highton,  Herbert,  157 

Hill,  J.,  on  war  aims  memoran- 
dum, 31 

Hillquit,  Morris,  282 

Hobson,  J.  A.,  339 

Hobson,   S.  G.,  335-  33^ 

Hodge,  John,  50;  to  the  iron  and 
steel  workers,  at  Hanley,  225 

Hotchkiss  Co.,  207-208 

House,  Colonel,  275 

Hughes,  W.  M.,  261,  263,  327,  340; 

at  Cardiflf,  226 
Hungarian     Social     Democratic 

Party,  317,  320 
Huysmans,    Camille,    311;    at    Not- 
tingham meeting,  86,  87 
Immigrant  groups  in  America,  307 
Imperial  Federation,  224 
Independent    Labour    Party,    inde- 
pendence,  219;    leaders,    40;    left 
and,     33 ;     Leicester     conference 
and  soldiers'  charter,  216;  peace 
resolution,    216,    218;     resolution 
on  the  war,  49 
Independent       Social      Democratic 
party  of  Germany,  319 


500 


INDEX 


Individualism,  336,  z:i7,  338,  341 

Industrial   conscription,   133 

Industrial  councils,  149,  igo;  gov- 
ernment and,  191 ;  Industrial 
Councils  and  Trade  Boards : 
Memorandum  by  the  Minister  of 
Reconstruction  and  the  Minister 
of  Labour,  440;  need  for,  192; 
See  also  Whitley  Reports 

Industrial  unionism.  See  Trade 
unionism 

Industrial  unrest,  137,  151,  155; 
causes,    157-158,  Z2>7 

I.  W.  W.,  282 

Industry,  democratic  control,  134, 
153;  reorganization,  134;  see  also 
Self-government   in    industry 

Inter-Allied  conference  in  London, 
Aug.  21,  1917,  44,  56 

Inter-Allied  labor  meeting  in  191S, 
76 

Inter-Allied  Labour  and  Socialist 
Conferences  at  London,  1917-18, 
56,  61,  94;  composition  and  dele- 
gates, 286;  five  commissions  and 
their  officers,  64,  65 ;  harmoniz- 
ing of  principles,  340;  Manches- 
ter Guardian  on,  71 ;  platform, 
67;  Socialism  the  crux,  278; 
Times  on,  yz 

Inter-Allied  trade  union  confer- 
ence of  Sept.  10,  1917,  233 

Interbelligerent  conference,  Amer- 
ican and  British  positions,  304; 
passport  question,  302,  303,  308; 
project  and  issue,  289,  292 

International  Federation  of  Trades 
Unions,  230 

International  labor  conference, 
300;  American  labor  position  as 
shown  in  the  Federationist,  230; 
German  obstacle,  301 ;  MacDon- 
ald's   vision,  85 

International  Socialist  Bureau,  33, 
66;  conference  of  Aug.  21,  1917, 
16 

Internationale,  265 

Ireland,  205 

Iron  and  steel  w^orkers,  225 

Italian    Socialists,  62 

Jingo  press,  6,  76 

Jingoism,  98 

Joint  memorandum.  See  under 
War   aims 

Joint  standing  industrial  councils. 
See  Whitley  Reports 


Jones,  Jack,  19,  115,  263 

Jowett,  F.  W.,  40 

Jubilee  year  of  the  Trades  Union 
Congress,   197 

Jugo-Slavs,  63 

Kautsky,  Karl,  311 

Keighley,    113 

Kerensky,  at  Labour  Party  confer- 
ence, June,  1918,  90,  94,  95,  96,97 

Kipling,    146 

Kirkwood,  David,   161,   162,  336 

Kneeshaw,  J.  W.,  296,  298 

Kropotkin,  Prince,  333 

Labor  boards.  See  Shop  Commit- 
tees, etc. 

Labor   formations,  various,    18 

Labor  members  of  the  coalition, 
220,  336 

Labor  movement,  American.  See 
American,   etc. 

Labor  movement,  British,  Amer- 
ican antithesis,  255 ;  American 
comparison,  52 ;  democratic  prin- 
ciples, 309;  early  development,  3  ; 
England  as  contrasted  with  other 
countries,  7;  extreme  left  and 
extreme  right,  291 ;  extreme 
right  motivations,  228;  joint 
statement  of  Oct.  9,  1918,  325; 
leaders,  173,  266,  335;  leadership, 
340;  majority  course,  292;  offen- 
sive (rise  of  international  pol- 
icy), 3;  organizing  sentiment,  56; 
peace  objectives — summary,  83- 
84;  personal,  53;  pressure  on  Al- 
lied governments  for  y/ar  aims 
statement,  320;  separatist  move- 
ments, 220;  so-called  split,  257; 
support  of  President  Wilson's 
course,  325 ;  tendency,  335 ;  three 
steps,  9,  334;  unity,  273,  285,  298; 
vitality,  341 ;  working  class  opin- 
ion, 54 

Labor  movement  in  Western  Eu- 
rope, 334 

Labor  representation  at  peace  ta- 
ble, 300,  304 

"Labor's   War   Aims,"  239 

Labour,  Minister  of.  Memoran- 
dum, etc.,  440 

Labour  and  the  New  Social  Or- 
der,  42,    45,    125,    224,    372 

Labour  Leader,  99 

Labour  Party,  British,  breaking  of 
truce  with  the  government,  iii; 
central   policy,   267;    constitution 


INDEX 


SOI 


as  adopted  by  the  party  confer- 
ence held  in  London,  Feb.  21, 
1918,  367;  election  in  June,  1918, 
257;  gains  in  general  election, 
270;  London  conference,  June, 
1918,  94,  113,  128,  221,  395;  make- 
up, 7;  membership  fluctuations, 
1900-1917,  107;  new  majority  in, 
11;  Nottingham  meeting,  42  (See 
also  Nottingham  meeting)  ;  ob- 
jects set  forth,  106;  organizers 
of  its  central  strength,  25;  plat- 
form at  General  Election,  Dec, 
1918,  413;  political  nature,  107; 
reconstruction  resolutions  adopt- 
ed June  26,  1918,  395;  reorgan- 
ization in  1918,  105 ;  resolution  of 
April,  1918,  75;  rising  power, 
145-146;  Socialism  reported  to 
America,  278;  summary  of  prin- 
ciples, 336 

Labour  War  Aims,  45 

Labour  Women,  142 

Land,  ^37 

Lansbury,  George,  33,  40 

Law,  Bonar,  188;  on  conscription 
of  wealth,    135 

Leading  strings  for  labor,  244 

League  of  Nations,  68,  69,  71,  73, 
224,  228 

Left,  swing  toward,  35,  45,  149,216, 
219 

Legien,  Carl,  230,  231 

Legislation,    11 1 

Leicester  conference,  216,  219 

Liberties,   337,  338 

Life,  control  of,  334 

Litvinoff,  on  Russia,  at  Notting- 
ham,  88 

Lloyd  George,  David,  on  Gompers, 
276;  on  statement  of  war  aims, 
29,  32;  personality,  137-138; 
Treasury  Agreement,   153 

London  Conference.  See  Inter-Al- 
lied Labour  and  Socialist  Con- 
ferences, etc. 

London  strike,  1918,  207 

London  Times.    See  Times 

Longuet,  Jean,  at  Nottingham 
meeting,  93 ;  on  Russia,  294 ;  per- 
sonality and  address  on  jingoism, 
98 

Lord,  James,  28 

Macarthur,  Mary  (Mrs.  W.  C.  An- 
derson), 140,   141 

MacDonald,   Ramsay,  at  Leicester 


conference,  216;  at  Nottingham 
meeting,  84;  interview  at  Not- 
tingharn,  38;  on  reconstruction, 
129;  on  Stockholm  conference, 
14;  personal  appearance,  93; 
stand  on  war  issues,  40 

Machines,   automatic,  151 

McKerrell,  T.,  19 

McManus,   163 

Mallon,  J.  J.,   188  _ 

Manchester  Guardian,  71,  77,  313 

Masaryk,   T.   G.,  307 

Maurice,  General,  323 

Maximalists    and    Minimalists,   90 

Maxton,  J.,  297 

Memorandum.       See     under     Waf 
aims 

Merchant  Seamen's  League,  261 

Middleton,  James,   125 

Militarism,   78 

Military  force  vs.  diplomatic,  324 

Miller,   H.   A.,  307 

Milner,  Lord,  55 

Miners,  138,  168;  conditions  in  the 
industry,  169;  in  the  war,  170 

Miners'  Federation,  168 

Minimum  wage,  156,  186 

Ministry,  labor  members,  220 

Mitchell,  John,  245 

Monopolies,    134 

Mooney  case,  297 

Morning  Post,  259,  260,  270 

Munition  workers,  157 

Munitions,  accelerating  output,  153 

Munitions  of   War  Act,   155,  162 

Murphy,  J.  T.,  166 

Nation  (London),  on  Gompers,  285 

Nation    (New   York),   308 

National  Civic  Federation,  245 

National    Council    of    the    Pottery 
Industry,   449 

National     Federation     of  •  Women 
Workers,    156 

National    Federation    of    Working 
Women,   141 

National    Guild,    180,   336 

Nationality  of   labor,   128 

Naylor,  T.   E.,  263 

Nezv  Age,  The,  181 

New  Republic,  77,   125 

New    Social    Order.  _    See    Labour 
and  the  New  Social  Order 

New  Statesman,  47,  53 

New  York  Tribune,  278,  280 

Newcastle  strike,   156 

Newport,  210,  211 


502 


INDEX 


Newspapers,    Nottingham,    46 

"No  annexations  and  no  indemni- 
ties,"  13,  34,  65,  234 

Nottingham,   45 

Nottingham  meeting  of  Jan.,  1918, 
35,  42,  Z7^\  international  labor 
conference,  absentees,  85,  86; 
resolutions  on  war  aims,  50 

Observer,  The,  260,  271 

Ogden,  J.  W.,  61 ;  at  Derby  meet- 
ing, 198;  on  labor  split,  260;  on 
world    brotherhood,    341 

Old  order  and  the  new,  326 

Oldham,  228 

Open  diplomacy  of  labor,  253 

Opinion,  L',  on   Gompers,  274 

Orage,  A.  R.,  335 

"Our  country,"  128 

Pacifism,    163 

Pankhurst,   Mrs.,  202 

Pankhurst,  Sylvia,  116 

Parkhead  Engineering  Works,  161, 
162 

Parliament  and  labor  representa- 
tion,   no.    III 

Passports,  202,  302,  303,  308 

Patriotism,    128 

Patterson,    Miss,    141 

Peace,  American  Federation  of 
Labor  formulation,  238;  ground- 
work, 299;  I.  L.  P.  resolution, 
216,  218;  President  Wilson's  ad- 
dress of  Sept.  27,  1918,  321,  327; 
resolution  at  Derby  meeting,  264 

Peace  Conference,  labor  represen- 
tation, 300 

Peace  proposals,  labor's  joint  state- 
ment, Oct.  9,  1918,  325 

Peace  without  victory,  218 

Petrograd,  236 

Phoenix  Dynamo  Co.,   184 

Piece  rate,  155 

Platform.  See  under  Labour 
Party 

Ploughshares,  74 

Political  action,  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor,  280-281 ;  labor  or- 
ganizations united  for,  145 ;  rise 
in  labor  movement,  no;  variance 
of  British  and  American  labor 
policies,    127 

Political   rights,   133 

Politics,  labor,  221 

Pottery  industry,  National  Coun- 
cil, objects  and  constitution,  449 

Product,  control  of,  193 


Prohibition,   13^" 

Protective  tariff,  339 

Prussian-Australianism,  339 

Prussianism,  industrial,   159 

Purdy,  W.  F.,  at  Nottingham  meet- 
ing, 48;  on  reconstruction,  129 

Quaker  employers,  summary  of 
conclusions    reached,   477 

Railway  unions,   172 

Railwaymen's  flare-up,  209 

Reactionaries,  255 

Reconstruction,  democracy's  work, 
33;i ;  draft  report  submitted  at  . 
Nottingham,  Jan.  23-25,  1918, 
372;  economic  reforms,  133-134; 
labor  report  on,  125 ;  labor's  ap- 
proach, 130;  resolutions  adopted 
by  the  conference  of  the  Labour 
Party,  London,  June  26,  1918, 
395;  Smillie  on,  176;  unity  of  la- 
bor parties,    128-129 

Reconstruction,  Minister  of,  Mem- 
orandum,  etc.,   440 

"Red  Flag,"  44 

Rees,   David,  28 

Renaudel,  Pierre,  at  June,  1918, 
conference,  97;  at  Nottingham, 
91-92 

Renold,  C.  G.,  181,  183;  Workshop 
Committees — Suggested  Lines  of 
Development  (from  the  Survey, 
Oct.  6,  1918),  452 

Representation  of  the  People  Act, 
105 

Restrictions  on  freedom,  132 

Revenue,   135 

Revolution,  333 

Revolutionary  forces,  334 

Revolutionists,    139 

Roberts,  George  H.,  112,  190,  208, 
261 ;  on  Gompers,  276 ;  on  Gom- 
pers' proposal,  20;  on  Stockholm 
conference,  13 ;  on  the  war  aims 
memorandum,  226 

Robinson,  W.  C.,  12 

Rolls-Royce  works,  184 

Root,  Elihu,  on  British  Labour 
Party,    112 

Root  Mission,  236 

Roubanovitch,  88 

Round  Table,  85 

Rowntree,  Seebohm,  189 

Russell,  C.  E.,  308 

Russia,  236;  committee  from,  259; 
committee  to  visit,  11;  Gompers' 
greetings,        234 ;        Henderson's 


INDEX 


503 


views  in  Aug.,  1917,  11;  interven- 
tion, 293,  294;  Kerensky  on,  96; 
labor     opinion     on     government 
mishandling,  54;  Litvinoff  on  the 
workers  and  revolution,  88;   res- 
olution   on,    at    London    confer- 
ence, 293 ;    Times  on,  294 
Safeguards  of  labor,  lost,   151,  158 
Sailors'  and  Firemen's  Union,  21 
Sailors'    boycott,    261 

St.   Paul  convention,  278,  280,  284 

Scheidemann,    Philip,   268,   314,  315 

Scientific  management,  180 

Secret  treaties,  76,  82,  297 

Seddon,  J.  A.,  257 

Self-determination,  68 

Self-government  in  industry,  178, 
338;  extension,  194;  programs, 
179-180 

Sexton,  James,  12,  205,  291,  298 

Sherman,  Camp,  307 

Shop  Committees  and  Labour 
Boards  (article  by  Arthur  Glea- 
son,  reprinted  from  the  Survey, 
May,   1917),  488 

Shop   organization,    181 

Shop  stewards,  Amalgamated  So- 
ciety of  Engineers  and,  i6r ;  ex- 
tension of  movement,  163,  164; 
significance,  149,  164 

Shop  stewards  committees,  178- 
179,   181 

Smillie,  Robert,  16,  145,  168,  173, 
174.  335;  at  June  conference, 
1918,  115;  at  Nottingham  conven- 
tion, 35;  on  reconstruction,  176; 
peace  resolution  of  the  L  L.  P., 
216-217;  personality,  114-115; 
personality  and  family,  169;  re- 
election, 270 

Smuts,    General,    316,    323 

"Sniping,"  221,  226 

Snowden,  Philip,  on  Stockholm 
conference,  34;  position,  214,  220 

Social  order,  old  and  new,  130,  136 

Socialism,  issue  between  American 
and  British  labor,  278 

Socialists,  Allied,  and  Gompers, 
284 ;_  American,  281 ;  English 
parties,  43;  German  rift,  313; 
Germany,  majority,  311,  315;  mi- 
nor  British   parties,   57 

Society,   democratic  control,    131 

Soldiers,   returned,   139 

Soldiers'   charter,   216 

State  ownership,  176 


Status  quo   ante,  67,   228 
Stockholm     committee,     Huysmans 

on,  87 
Stockholm     conference,     discussion 
on  attending,   12;  minority  labor 
view,    34;    "Socialist    Stockholm" 
and     "trade     union     Stockholm," 
235 
Stockholms,  the  two,  234 
Stoney,   Gerald,   158 
Strikes,    Clyde    District,    162;    Lon- 
don traction,   1918,  207;   railway- 
men,   209;    Treasury  Agreement, 
153,  154 
Strong,  H.  O.,  &  Sons,  184 
Stuart-Bunning,  G.  H.,  286-287 
Submarines,  22,  263 
Suffrage.     See  Woman  Suffrage 
Survey,  The,  77,  452,  488 
Sword  or  ploughshare,  74 
Syndicalism,  334 
TaflfVale  case,  no,  172 
Tdglische  Rundschau,  314 
Taxation,   135,  22>^,  337 
Telegraph,   1 19 
Tennant,  H.  J.,  152 
Thomas,    Albert,    at    London    con- 
ference,     Feb.,      1918,     63;      on 
French    workers,    298;    personal- 
ity, 98 
Thomas,    J.    H.,    loi,    172,    173;    at 
Blackpool  meeting,  24;  at  Derby, 
1918,    199;    Dublin   address,   205; 
on       reconstruction,       129;       on 
Stockholm     conference,     15;     on 
war      aims      memorandum,      31 ; 
peace  resolution   at   Derby  meet- 
ing, 264 ;  personality,  53  ;  railway 
strike,   209-210,   211,  212,  213 
Thorne,   Will,    16,   20 
Tillett,   Ben,  23 

Times,    on     Gompers    at     London 
Conference,  277,  286;  on  London 
Conference  of  Feb.,  1918,  72,  77, 
78;  on  Russia,  294;  on  Stockholm 
conference,  15 
Trade    boards.     See   under   Indus- 
trial councils 
Trade    Union   Labour    Party,   pro- 
posed formation,  258 
Trade  union  officials,  164 
Trade     unionism,     109,     no,     168; 
latent  power,  174;  reorganization, 
175;  trade  unions,  107,  108;  force 
of  combinations,  176;  influence  in 


504 


INDEX 


Cabour  Party,  267;   membership, 
174;  women's,   141 

Trades  Union  Congress,  action  on 
Stockholm  conference,  16;  jubi- 
lee year,  197;  swing  toward  the 
left  (three  annual  meetings,  1916- 
18),  18 

Treasury   Agreement,    153 

Triple   Alliance,    168,    172 

Triple  Industrial  Alliance,  177 

Troelstra,  94,  100,  315 

Trotsky,  7 

Truce,  breaking,   in,   119 

Turner,  Ben,  on  breaking  the  truce, 
118 

United  States  labor  bodies  and 
British   policy,    126 

Unity   and   uniformity,   298 

Unskilled  labor,  151,  I57,  208 

Vandervelde,  fimile,  247;  at  June, 
1918,  conference,  99;  at  London 
conference,  74;  at  Nottingham, 
86,  90 

Vaughan,    Crawford,   248 

Victory,  79,  253 

Vorwarts,   74,   311-312 

Wages,  132;  standard,  155 

Walling,  W.  E.,  247.  266,  268 

Walsh,   Stephen,   31 

Wansbeck,  113,  115 

War,  civil  offensive  results,  322; 
new  tactics,  323-324 

War  aims,  16,  298,  299:  Allied  la- 
bor's, 67;  joint  memorandum 
adopted  at  Central  Hall,  Feb.  20- 
24,  1918,  29,  67,  352;  joint  state- 
ment adopted  at  Central  Hall, 
Dec.  28,  1917,  343  I  labor  and  Al- 
lied governments,  320;  Notting- 
ham resolutions,  50;  Premier's 
letter,  29;  President  Wilson  on 
(Sept.  27,  1918),  321,  327;  Vor- 
warts on  the  memorandum,  311- 

War  Aims  Committee  at  London 
conference,    Sept.,    1918,   296 

Watkins,  W.   H.,  144 

Wealth,  conscription  of,  13S.  13", 
336;   socialization  of,  337 

Webb,  Sidney,  53,  ?>?,7 ;  on  Hender- 
son's resignation,  53;  personal 
appearance,  90;  position,  335 

Whitefield,  W.,  116 


Whitley    Committee,    composition, 

185-186 
Whitley  Committees,  167 
Whitley  Reports,  149,  178,  183,  185. 
339 ;  government  and,  187 ;  In- 
terim Report  on  Joint  Standing 
Industrial  Councils,  418;  Second 
Report  on  Joint  Standing  Indus- 
trial Councils,  427;  Supplemen- 
tary Report  on  Works  Commit- 
tees, 436 

Williams,  J.  B.,  attempt  to  disrupt 
labor   unity,   258 

Williams,  Robert,  116,  173;  at 
Blackpool  meeting,  23 

Wilson,  J.  Havelock,  30,  208-209;  at 
Blackpool  meeting,  22;  at  Derby 
meeting,  198,  203;  Hughes  on, 
261 ;  in  Scotland,  262 ;  peace  res- 
olution, 264 

Wilson,  James,  at  Whitehall,  April, 
1918,  251 ;  misleading  report  of 
British  conditions,  214 

Wilson,  President,  Baltimore 
speech  in  April,  1918,  and  ele- 
ments of  his  offensive,  80;  call 
to  working  classes  of  Central 
Empires  (Sept.  27,  1918),  309; 
four  propositions  of,  Feb.  li, 
1918,  68;  fourteen  points,  8,  76, 
238,  273,  288,  299,  305,  321;  lone 
hand,  309;  war  aims  and  peace 
(Sept.   27,    1918),   321,   327 

"Win   the   War,"    128 

Woman  suffrage,  142-143 

Woman's  Trade  Union  League,  141 

VVomen,  engineering  trades,  152, 
157 ;  movement  in  industry,  140- 
141 ;    new    wage-earning,    140 

Work   for   all,  337-338 

Workers'  control,  147,  335>  ?>3\,  see 
also  Self-government  in  industry 

Workers'  Union,   142 

Works  Committees,  Ministry  of 
Labour  on,  188;  Whitley  Report 
on  Works  Committees,  436 

Workshop  Committees,  Suggested 
Lines  of  Development  (article  by 
C.  G.  Renold  from  the  Survey, 
Oct.  6.  1918),  452 

World  labor  congress.  See  Inter- 
national labor  conference 

Wright,   Chester,  249 

Zimmern,  A.   E.,   14S.  254 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


Series  9482 


UC SOUTHERN 


REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA      000  292  246    6 


